HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: platt@watson.ibm.com (Daniel E. Platt)
Subject: Re: Deficit - can it be corrected?
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1992 14:23:47 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <1992Oct5.085151.11751@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com>, markr@mot.com (Mark) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct02.141437.160192@watson.ibm.com> platt@watson.ibm.com (Daniel E. Platt) writes:
|> > . . . .
|> >If you go to a hospital, it becomes obvious why costs are so high.  There
|> >is no incentive to keep costs down.  People can go get health care at any
|> >institution regardless of the rates charged.  Most people never really
|> >have to look at their bills; that's all handled for them by the hospital,
|> >who bills the insurance companies directly.  Medical costs are hard to
|> >control because there is effectively no market.
|> 
|> This one could be tackled this way : Allow only 90% of medical costs to be
|> insured, while 10% MUST be paid by the patient.  Of course, with a cap
|> of, say 20%, of ones income, so as not to bankrupt the patient, but to make
|> it painful enough that the patient will be inclined to seek out less expensive
|> medical care.

Right now, my employee insurance covers only 80% of my diagnostics.  That
is a disincentive to having problems looked at, some of which could be much
more expensive to look at later.

I still like the idea of having a patient apply for payments for treatment,
and then look for contractors; if the patient wants to pay more than they've
received, they can; otherwise, they can keep the difference (they may need it).
In any case, they'd have an incentive.  10% of $250,000.00 is still enough
to bankrupt some folks.

Dan
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman)
Subject: To all you Hyperinflation Weenies out there....
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 03:19:03 GMT

I can still remember my High School Econ teacher describing U.S. Savings
Bonds as the safest investment in the world.  She said "If the Federal
Goverment can't pay its bills, money will be the last of your worries."

She was right.

About money being the last of your worries, that is.

At this point, its only a matter of who gets the shaft.  _Someone_ is
going to get it.  Hyperinflation gives the shaft to retirees and savers.
Excessive taxation gives the shaft to workers.  Flat-out defaulting on
the debt gives the shaft to investors in U.S. Bonds--who are mostly
banks and retirees.

OK, now which group of people do you think have enough power in America
to shift the shaft to the other groups?
From: khanh@curtiss.seas.ucla.edu (Khanh V. Nguyen)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: A NEW WAY TO REDUCE THE PUBLIC DEBT
Date: 2 Oct 92 01:13:43 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: SEASnet, University of California, Los Angeles

This is the answer to the criticisms of my proposed plan to reduce the 
public debt thru inflation:

A continuous public debt is not unusual, but America's debt has reached
a point that it is no longer manageable. The govt. has to borrow more
and more to pay the interest. This pyramid game sooner or later will 
explode. The only thing to do then is to declare the bankrupcy of the
United States and to auction America. My plan is painful, but it is
a kind of Shock Therapy. As soon as the debt has been devalued to a 
certain point, a new currency will be established to eliminate the high
inflation.

Many people point to Brazil, Argentina, ....  as counter examples
to my plan. They miss the point that most of the debts of these nations
are in foreign currencies, therefore no matter how high their inflation
is, their debt will not be significantly reduced.

In the case of Germany's hyper-inflation after W.W.I, see how the bankrupted
nation became the dominating power in Europe ten years later. After all, 
I do not call for a hyper-inflation. A 30% inflation in two years is enough
to reduce the public debt to half (While it needs to double the income tax
of all Americans just to eliminate this year's deficit, not to mention to
reduce the debt, source: Perot's "United We Stand")

I believe that given the current public debt, inflation is inevitable. But
the sooner we accept it, the less painful it is. 

The problem is that most Americans underestimate the size of the public
debt and overestimate America's ability to pay. They still think that
the debt can be reduce by traditional ways (cut spending, increase tax ...)
That's why my painful but efficient plan is not understood.

Kan Nuel.


     "This note is LEGAL tender for all debts, PUBLIC and private"
                                 Quoted from US's one dollar bill.
From: jmo@livia.princeton.edu (Mike Orszag)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Problems with Neo-Classical Economics
Date: 29 Sep 92 23:32:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: Princeto.1992Sep29.233253.28566
Organization: Princeton University

Mr. Thompson, let us talk about macroeconomics only. The theory
does not match the data well at all except when it is cooked to
do so by dishonest manipulation of Solow residuals. The theory
has no predictive power or policy usefullness. The theory 
is not self-consistent and predicts no numbers without mindless
manipulation of parameters. Now, let us talk about assumptions
and why the models might not work. Let us confine ourselves
to three key assumptions: (1) representative agent, (2) expected
utility, (3) stationary environment. None of these assumptions
has empirical support and they all drive the results. The
important thing is to get the models to work but in terms
of listing bad assumptions which lead to bad theory and bad
predictions, I think I have answered your question.

-- MIKE ORSZAG, University of Michigan
Xref: sparky sci.econ:7963 talk.politics.theory:4450
From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,talk.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Philosophy 101
Date: 7 Oct 92 02:45:22 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.theory
Organization: mydog in exile

| gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:
| > My existence is dependent on being in a society.  Human beings
| > are extremely social animals.  Very few of us could survive in
| > isolation from human society.  And without language, a tool
| > or mental organ that does not exist apart from society, I
| > could certainly not conceive of political or philosophical
| > ideas, much less post them on Usenet.  I could make free
| > judgments, perhaps, about which banana to pluck....

thant@void.esd.sgi.com (Thant Tessman) writes:
| A methodological nit to pick:
| From Human_Action by Ludwig von Mises:
| 
| Praxeology deals with the actions of individual men.  It is only in the
| further course of its inquiries that cognition of human cooperation is
| attained and social action is treated as a special case of the more
| universal category of human action as such.  ...

I wouldn't call this a nit, I'd call it a separate subject.
Brian Yoder was, I thought, denying the existence or
signficance of collectivities.  I was reminding him of some
of them, not denying the existence or significance of 
individuals or "The Individual."

However, I would disagree with von Mises.  To my mind, in
doing science or philosophy, one starts with what is before
one.  When studying gasses, Science did not start with
molecules or quarks, although these surely underly the gas
and explain much of its behavior.  Gasses were studied long
before molecules were understood.

We have a much better idea of individuals, however, so they
present themselves to us _at_the_same_time_ as their
collectivities.  And there is no point -- to me -- in saying
one has to start with one, and go to the other.  The fact
that a human being can belong to a number of collectivities
at once does not seem crucial to me, just as it is not
crucial that a collectivity can persist even if all the
individuals in it are replaced.
-- 
 )*(    Gordon Fitch    )*(    gcf@panix.com    )*(
( 1238 Blg. Grn. Sta.,  NY NY 10274 * 718.273.5556 )
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: Bruce.Scott@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Bruce Scott)
Subject: Re: Racism in America
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 17:08:22 GMT

ipser@solomon.technet.sg (Ed Ipser) writes:
>Native Americans, for instance, have had billions spent in their name by
>their very own U.S. goverment department for the past 100 years. Yet they
>come in dead last in just about every measure of economic or social
>status. Could lead the unsophisticated to spot a dangerously suggestive
>correlation.

The implications of this statement are pure BS. In fact, much money
spent on the BIA was simply raked off by the people in the BIA, and very
little in the way of money, goods, self-help, or education actually got
to the people for whom it was intended. Too bad, they say, there just
weren't a lot of powerful folks in any constituency which could defend
the rights and interests of Native Americans (this is a great test case
which shows the failure of Libertarianism in a racist country). Add to
this the phenomenon in force until quite recently of the kids in BIA
schools being told that their culture was a failure and that they should
really try to grow up as white folks. Think about what that does to a
kid's self-esteem. It is enough by itself to keep most of them in the
destitute shape they are in. But maybe it is not so incorrect to suggest
that Government Aid helped bring them down (as the aid sent to corrupt
rulers in Africa also works). Most of them just wanted to be left alone,
and on reasonable land. Read:

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, by Dee Brown

Custer Died for Your Sins, by Vine Deloria, Jr

for starters. The list gets longer.

Gruss,
Dr Bruce Scott                             The deadliest bullshit is
Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik       odorless and transparent
bds at spl6n1.aug.ipp-garching.mpg.de                 -- W Gibson

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: sci.econ,talk.politics.misc
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: Currency systems
Originator: rja@redwood26
Keywords: n
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Distribution: na
Date: 28 Sep 92 10:56:26 CDT


In article <1651@hsvaic.boeing.com>, eder@hsvaic.boeing.com (Dani Eder) writes:
> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
> >In article <136979@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV>, michael@rosebud.llnl.gov (Mike Slominski) writes:
> >> 
> >> Standardizing money on something of practical value is the only real
> >> way to insure the stability of a currency.
> 
> >Milton Friedman disagrees.  He has proposed a that the money supply 
> >be increased only at the rate of GNP growth to ensure stable prices.
> 
> >> The idea of a "gold standard" is NOT childish nonsense but gold is
> >> probably not the best commodity to standardize to - the real (not
> >> dollar) value of gold does vary a little too much.  The best scheme
> >> I've come across bases money on a "bucket of commodities," all of
> >> which have practical value.  If one of the commodities loses its
> >> practical value, another is substituted.  As it stands, it's not
> >> inconceivable that people could lose faith in the little green pieces
> >> of paper in my wallet.  And though I may lose a little on my American
> >> eagles (U.S. gold coins), they're a lot trustier than little green
> >> pieces of paper.
> 
> >If you use the largest "bucket of commodities" (the entire economy), then
> >your solution is what we have now: a currency with a value based on what
> >people will exchange for it.
> 
> What is desired is a standard of value whose measure can be fixed
> with certainty.

That's what a futures market is for.  It allows you to lock in a future
price to avoid uncertainty.

>                  The dollar used to simply be a unit of measure of
> silver, approx 0.78 ounce silver in the form of a coin of 90% purity
> (the other 10% was alloying metal to make the coin more durable,
> .  The specific mass of silver in the coin was determined by historical
> accident, it was the average content of the spanish silver dollars in
> circulation at the time of the Coinage Act of 1793.  Today, since
> we are currently divorced from any precious metal coinage, we are
> free to pick a round number to set the standard of value.  I
> propose 1 oz troy as the standard.  A metric standard might also
> be appropriate, with 20 or 25 grams of silver approximating the old
> silver dolar.  To make it clear that the coins represent specific
> masses of precious metal, we can be radical and eliminate the dollar
> altogether as the primary unit, and have the coinage read "10 grams
> silver", or "1/2 ounce silver".  This would make it obvious if
> someone was attempting to debase the coinage.


-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
From: GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu (Broward Horne)
Subject:      Re: Who is the customer?
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 16:10:31 MST
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA12861; Thu, 1 Oct 92 15:19:31 -0700
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA08444; Thu, 1 Oct 92 15:16:38 -0700
X-Received: from IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU by idbsu.idbsu.edu (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.2MX) with BSMTP id 1738; Thu, 01 Oct 92 16:15:35 MST
X-Received: from IDBSU (GCTHORNE) by IDBSU.IDBSU.EDU (Mailer R2.08) with BSMTP id 1510; Thu, 01 Oct 92 16:15:34 MST
X-To: sci.econ.usenet

From: pwg1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Paul W. Grimes)
Subject: Who is the customer?
Keywords: education

>colleges of business) explicitly states that the customers of
>business schools are the _firms_ which hire graduates.  This view
>relagates the student to an input, not a consumer.  The AACSB says

>Paul

     What next?  TQM?

     Uhhh, well, as matter of fact...

     One recent proposal I've seen mentions measuring the quality of
     "inputs"  ( pre-class students ), measuring "outputs" ( post-class
     students ), etc.

      JIT should be possible too.  Just hold off teaching any one vocation
      or skill, until an upcoming job is scheduled to be filled.  Companies
      could just submit an order.  A custom made employee!

      Just think of the inventory savings.
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: grasmeye@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Joel M. Grasmeyer)
Subject: Is This Offer A SCAM?
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 20:59:38 GMT

I just received two promotional offers from American Clearinghouse and a
company called Mastercare International, Inc.  They offer a "guarantee" 
of receiving one of four prizes--a car, a TV, a vacation package, or $5,000.
In turn, I am "asked" to try some cleaning products or a water filtration 
system.  Are either of these offers valid?  Are the companies themselves valid?
Are there any laws governing these companies, or requiring them to come through
with the prize?  What sources could I use to research the validity of these 
offers?
 
Any response would be greatly appreciated.

Joel Grasmeyer
grasmeye@gn.ecn.purdue.edu


Xref: sparky sci.econ:7933 talk.politics.misc:49333
From: wouk@alumni.cs.colorado.edu (Arthur Wouk)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Unemploment (Re: Presidential Debates)
Date: 3 Oct 92 18:12:10 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

In article <1992Oct2.124453.12327@hemlock.cray.com> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>

>
>Do you mean the way that there were 57,000 fewer jobs last month, new claims
>for unemployment has been up every week for the last 5 weeks, yet the
>unemploment rate went *down* to 7.5%?
>
>I'm still trying to figure out how fewer jobs and more unemploment claims
>can result in lower unemployment.  Maybe I'll find out after November 3rd...
>
>The country has 200,000 fewer jobs than 2 months ago while the unemployment
>rate has dropped 0.2%.  
>

the trick isn't in the number of employed. it lies in how you define
the total number of unemployed. how to do you estimate the number not
looking for work because they are discouraged?  how do you count the
part timers who would like to be fully employed.

thus even if the number of employed decreases, suitable fudging of the
total which is put in the denominator can make ratio of unemployed to
total smaller even if the employed number decreases. this is called
creative accounting in the accounting profession.

realistic estimates of the unemployment rate, using methods used
in some other countries for the calculation, give a  us unemployment rate
substantially over 10%.

(you pays your money and you takes your pick. it was not for nothing
that the reagan administration tried to gut the data collection for
the BLS in the early 80s. they succeeded in large part.)
-- 
arthur wouk 
internet: wouk@alumni.cs.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: cthorne@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Charles E Thorne)
Subject: Re: You can't be serious
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 19:05:44 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.224548.25154@bnr.ca> bucknerb@bnr.ca (Brent Buckner) writes:
>In article <9209242219.AA06712@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com> GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu (Broward Horne) writes:
>>(Paul W. Grimes) writes:
>>>The federal deficit when compared to aggregate output is not relatively
>>>large.  It is true that theory predicts higher interest rates will

>>     ahem, yes, I've heard this one before too.  From some recent
>>     reading, since you're one of those who bring up the % of debt
>>     to GDP garbage.  Yes, after WWII, the percentage was higher.
>>     And, after WWII, the U.S. had no internation competition. The
>>     U.S. government cut spending.  The U.S. government cut taxes.

>>     Tell me with a straight face.  Tell me that's gonna happen.


>>>(assuming we are spending on productive capital).  We should be more
>>>worry less about the SIZE of the debt.

>>          I'm not worried about the size, chum.
>>          I'm worried about the rate of growth graphs I made two years ago.

>The debt is and has been growing more quickly than the economy.
>The longer that this trend continues, the harder it is to reverse.
>I suspect that it is the failure of the current political configuration
>to make any progress toward reversing the trend that heightens
>pessimism.  The deficit (and by implication the debt and debt-to-GDP
>ratio) has supposedly been high on the political agenda, and there
>has not been long-term success.

What really bothers me about looking at the federal debt/GNP ratio is this
is the wrong ratio to look at.  The federal debt is the "government" debt.
The GNP is the peoples income.  The assumption that the ratio is acceptable
assumes that GNP is "government" income--which it is not.  A better ratio
would be to compare federal debt with federal income (which is about a factor
of 5).

Charlie
Newsgroups: sci.econ,talk.politics.misc
From: bgoffe@seq.uncwil.edu (goffe bill )
Subject: Re: Unemploment
Organization: Univ. of North Carolina @ Wilmington
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 22:13:42 GMT

mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Michael Polen) writes:

  (material deleted)
>The unemployment numbers try to do this, but they do not properly count 
>those that have been out of work so long that they are no longer elegible 
>for unemployment benefits, so they no longer register themselves to be 
>counted.

I may be misunderstanding this, but the unemployment rate does not depend
upon one registering for unemployment (in fact, in the late 80's, only about
half those eligable for unemployment compensation filed for it). The rate
is calculated by a household survey (done in person) during the week that
includes the 19th. The sample size is approximately 60,000 households (rather
interestingly, only 4 or 5% of households don't answer; the survey takers
are quite persistent). One is counted as unemployed if you didn't have a 
job but looked for one in most any fashion or form (checked with friends, 
answered job ads, etc.)

Perhaps you're thinking of discouraged workers, who make no effort to find
a job?

For more details, see Norman Frumkin, _Guide to Economic Indicators_, M.E.
Sharpe, 1990, ISBN 0-87332-521-4 (0-87332-620-2 paperback), pp. 224-230.

Bill Goffe
Department of Economics and Finance
University of North Carolina @ Wilmington
bgoffe@seq.uncwil.edu
Xref: sparky sci.econ:7852 talk.politics.theory:4380
From: thant@void.esd.sgi.com (Thant Tessman)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,talk.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Economic Discrimination was Outgrowing Libertarianism...
Date: 29 Sep 92 19:48:43 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA


In article <BvCq78.Gzq@apollo.hp.com>, nelson_p@apollo.hp.com writes:

[...]

>   The bottom line is this: Mr. Yoder has made a positive assertion
>   that free will exists.   In logic the onus is on the one making 
>   positive assertion to support it.  I'm under no logical obligation
>   to try to "disprove" free will; my role in this is merely to point
>   out that there is no apparent mechanism to account for it in the
>   universe as I am aware of it, and to demand that Mr. Yoder either
>   produce (or at least suggest) one, or stop talking nonsesne.

It is irrelevant whether or not it is true that at some level 
human behavior is nothing more than the product of deterministic 
machinery because that determinism is lost to us anyway.  The 
observer and the observed can never fully be the same thing.

In other words, determinism is logically useless in describing
human behavior.  One might not be able to prove the existence of
free-will (as if that wasn't itself a contradiction in terms), but 
free-will is unavoidable as an operating premise.

thant
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: nfs@hart (Norbert Schlenker)
Subject: Re: A NEW WAY TO REDUCE THE PUBLIC DEBT
Organization: Princeton University, Dept. of Computer Science
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 03:01:34 GMT

In article <8239@lee.SEAS.UCLA.EDU> khanh@curtiss.seas.ucla.edu (Khanh V. Nguyen) writes:
>My plan is painful, but it is a kind of Shock Therapy...

Boy, is it ever!

>I do not call for a hyper-inflation. A 30% inflation in two years is enough
>to reduce the public debt to half.

It isn't.  If you mean that we should run 30% inflation rates for two years
and we assume that nobody notices, then the debt is cut by only 40% in
real terms.  Regrettably, everybody IS going to notice and the government
will be paying 32% on short term bills and 15-35% on long bonds (the range
depending on whether people think the inflation is intentional or not).
Since the feds are borrowing over $400 billion this fiscal year and
probably more next year, the interest costs are going to eat them (i.e.
us) alive.

You might also want to explain how to avoid the collapse of the banking
system, as more than 80% of the country's banks will be insolvent if
their bond portfolios are trading for 60 cents on the dollar.

Norbert
nfs@cs.princeton.edu


Newsgroups: sci.econ,talk.politics.theory