Carpe Diem

Tuesday afternoon links

1. In the spirit of Warren Buffett, some of France’s richest executives and billionaires signed a petition about a year ago asking for higher income tax rates so they could “contribute.”  But they weren’t expecting a 75% tax rate, and now they’re “crying foul” and moving or threatening to move, according to Andrew Ross Sorkin in his article “Welcoming Higher Taxes, But Not That High.”

2. A new housing survey from Fannie Mae shows that Americans are generally optimistic about the housing recovery and the overall U.S. economy, and they expect gradual increases in home prices to continue.

3. Used car prices are falling, as inventory levels climb due to increases in the supply of trade-ins from people buying new cars, see Detroit News article and the Manheim Used Vehicle Value Index, which fell to a two-year low last month.

4. Olive Garden and Red Lobster restaurants are putting more workers on part-time status in a test aimed at limiting the impact of looming health coverage requirements. The test entails increasing the number of workers on part-time status, meaning they work less fewer than 30 hours a week. Under the new health care act, companies will be required to provide health care to full-time employees by 2014, which would significantly boost labor costs for businesses.

5. Britain will seek to open up its potential reserves of shale gas, with a “generous new tax regime,” the Chancellor has revealed, in a promise which has dismayed environmentalists.

6. Could 3-D printing completely eliminate the market for a globalized supply chain?  Maybe.

7. Home Tours Increase 3% in September and Offers Were Up 4% according to Redfin Real-Time Demand Pulse; Home Sales Show No Sign of Slowing Down.

8. Continental Resources announced today that it plans to triple oil production to 300,000 barrels per day by 2017, with much of that increased production planned in the Bakken region.

9. As American Waistlines Grow, So Do Refrigerator Sizes

10. Swedish lunch lady is slammed for making school cafeteria food so good that it’s unfair to students at other schools??

55 thoughts on “Tuesday afternoon links

  1. I’m not surprised that Darden is taking steps to reduce the fianancial impact of Obamacare. in the early 80s, I worked for Darden (then part of General Mills) as a financial analyst. They were a financially savvy group then, and seem to still be. Liberals will probably cry “foul” as more companies take steps such as these. Uninformed workers who lose their full time status and benefits will likely blame “corporate greed”, and never connect the dots.

    • In many states, if an employee works over 30 or 35 hours a week, the employer is required to offer benefits equal to others in the firm.

      • Which is why companies will create policies which allow parttime employees to work no more than 29 hours per week. So how did such laws benefit the employees who want to work more hours?

        • I think at this point you had better ask yourself “what kind of country do I want.” Because if you think that health care should be easily scuttled for millions of people just so the (sic) “job creator” can fatten his bottom line, you better examine your conscience.

          People aren’t commodities, and we are relitigating 19th century arguments. Which is horrifying.

          By the way: This “holding back” of hours has been going on for years now. Which is why it makes utterly good sense to have people get their own insurance, and not have their employers dictate to a free people what kind of coverage they have, or of Jesus will OK the procedure.

          Witholding benefits by forcing people to work fewer hours- or conversely YOUR idea to let them work MORE hours and get no benefits- is absolutely barbaric, and is a practice unknown in any G-7 nation, and I daresay probably the G-20.

          When Western reporters were based in Moscow before the Soviet Union fell, they called it “Upper Volta with Rockets.” We’re heading down the same path.

          • Max,

            You really need to start making coherent arguements. Your rant is all over the place and makes no sense.

            “Because if you think that health care should be easily scuttled for millions of people ”
            “it makes utterly good sense to have people get their own insurance”

            This two statements from you don’t make sense together. Seems to me that this is what is happening here, the employer is not willing to pay the mandated employer provided insurance and now the part timers are free to buy their own insurance.

            “Witholding benefits by forcing people to work fewer hours”

            No one is forcing these people to work period. The government is forcing the employer to provide ins. for people who work more than 30 hours, that is the only coercion occuring here.

            “When Western reporters were based in Moscow before the Soviet Union fell, they called it “Upper Volta with Rockets.” We’re heading down the same path.”

            Communist Russia was defined by government control of the means of production, government dictated every aspect of the economy and redistributed income based on the government’s choice of who gets what. The posters here are for limited government and free markets…..the opposite of Soviet Russia. Get you facts straight.

          • Barbaric? Liberal emotional rubbish. How do you think restaurants will absorb these additional costs while running a 2%-6% pre-tax net profit margin?

          • Max, I know exactly what kind of country I want:

            - a country where people are responsible for taking care of themselves;

            - a country where government stays out of the lives of its citizens as much as possible.

            I would guess that the kind of country you would want is entirely different. The main differrence between the two of us is that you probably want me to pay for the country you want.

          • Mr. “Give Me Freedom”

            this is what unfettered markets and lack of government oversight provides:

            http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-11/food-sickens-millions-as-industry-paid-inspectors-find-it-safe.html

            “You are just another arrogant liberal who thinks that people are too corrupt, stupid and easily fooled to be able to make their own decisions and as such the government should step in and make those decisions for them.”

            You’re goddamned right.

          • “The “slogans” as you call them, are meaningless only to you as you have no clue about free markets and limited government.

            Free markets don’t exist because the US chamber of commerce and their paymasters won’t allow them to exist? It is only people like you who understand business?

            Seems like you are reducing your argument to a few stupid slogans.”

            No, that would be YOUR problem. Markets are fixed by those who stand to profit from their manipulation, and if you haven’t seen evidence of that, you’re blind.

            You suffer the same affliction as Marxists: you romanticize a world that will never exist, BECAUSE YOU FORGET THE WAY THAT PEOPLE ACTUALLY ACT.

            You just witnessed the manipulation of the interest rate benchmark (LIBOR) for over $500 trillion in debt obligations and structured notes, to name just ONE example. But never mind.

            When corporations fix the game in their favor, its a “free market.” When government tries to regulate the excesses, it’s “socialism.”

            GROW UP.

          • Give me Freedom said:
            “You are just another arrogant liberal who thinks that people are too corrupt, stupid and easily fooled to be able to make their own decisions and as such the government should step in and make those decisions for them.”

            Max Planck said: “You’re goddamned right.”

            This is all we need to know about Max Planck. You need not post any more Max, for you have revealed your true colours for all of us to see. You want to take away our freedom and replace it with your will, under the guise that it is for our own best interest.

          • “This is all we need to know about Max Planck. You need not post any more Max, for you have revealed your true colours for all of us to see. You want to take away our freedom and replace it with your will, under the guise that it is for our own best interest.”

            The joke is you vote against your own best interest every time. And you think you’re making the country “better.”

            Keep avoiding the substance of the issues. Living is easy with eyes closed.

          • My eyes are wide open and I see you for exactly what you are, a threat to everyone’s freedom.

            The most important issue is Freedom.

            Go find some blog filled with similar small minded, arrogant communists like yourself.

          • “My eyes are wide open and I see you for exactly what you are, a threat to everyone’s freedom.”

            Oh, shut up, fool.

          • Max said “This remark is brilliant: “No one is forcing these people to work period.”

            There’s “conservative” values for you.”

            There is nothing either conservative or liberal about that statement. In response to a change in costs brought on by government regulations, these employers are changing the type of jobs they are offering from full time to part time. The employees are not forced to work part time jobs, they can choose to accept it or not.

            You said employees are forced to accept them, I pointed out the error in your logic. That is neither conservative or liberal, just logical.

            If your point is that conservatives tend to be more logical, then I will grant you that point, but the rest of what you said is useless.

          • Then, under the law, the employees who do not have health insurance will go out and get it themselves. And since the employer is no longer paying for the insurance, he can afford to pay his workers more.

            The simple solution would have been to go to a single payer system, and get the employers out of the benefits management business to begin with, and force insurors to REALLY compete, but that would make too much sense.

            Just remember: we haven’t had a “free market” in health care since WWII ended, and anyone who thinks so is delusional.

            And you, and this site, are not “conservative.” Not by a long shot.

          • Well Max, I surprisingly find myself agreeing with some of what you just posted. Let people go out and get health insurance for themselves in a free competitive market for health insurance. If employers want to offer that as a benefit to their employees then the employers should be free to decide that.

            Employers will pay (and pay comes in many forms, wages, benefits, extra vacation time, etc) employees what they feel the employees are worth. Employees either agree to that level of compensation or not. Why should the government get involved in that free exchange between employer and employee?

            Seems that now you are against Obamacare.

            I am all for a totally free market in health care.

            As for this site and I not being “conservative”, I would not attempt to speak for this site or for Dr. Perry, but as for me, I never stated that I am conservative. I have a very simple belief, that the best option for the improvement of living standards for the average person in this world is a society in which we have free markets and limited government.

            What is your belief Max?

          • }}}} The simple solution would have been to go to a single payer system, and get the employers out of the benefits management business to begin with

            And therein lies max’s ridiculous connection that has no reason to exist.

            You are correct, the simple solution would have been to get employers out of the benefits management business.

            Employers should, at most, say “we’ll give you ‘x’ dollars for your health insurance, regardless of how much it costs.” Then you go get your own and pay for it yourself. Apply suitable tax-break laws as everyone deems appropriate.

            At no point is there ANY reason to require this involve “single payer”. In fact, it works MUCH better without “single payer”, since you can get whatever coverage you feel is important. If you’re 22yo and not particularly active, then maybe 10k deductible with $100 co-pays is okay with you… and you can pocket the difference in insurance expense savings.

            If you’re 65 and certain you’re going to need a knee operation in the next 5 years, then you get appropriate insurance that will cover that and allow you to manage your expenses for the time you’re off from work (or away from the retirement villas).

            We don’t have government-run auto insurance, we don’t have government-run home insurance. There’s no intelligent reason to have government-run medical insurance.

          • I’m not against Obamacare, and Obama himself was in favor of a single payer system. But Congress won’t do it because they’re paid off, and the American people, for all of their empty bravado, would be scared out of their wits if it actually happened. They tell you they don’t like “Nanny States” but they’re thrilled with “Nanny employers” who can stick you with the coverage THEY want. Is that “freedom?” Again: companies should focus on making things and providing services, not running benefits operations.

            How’s that for a contradiction?

            Obamacare was a compromise to patch up the most effed up health care system operating in any developed country. It made sense to mandate that everyone get coverage as a logical step to bring down costs, and without getting into the weeds, there’s a good deal of common sense in the bill. 85% of the damn thing is just a cut-and-paste job from existing Medicare law anyway. There’s really nothing terribly new there.

            The first thing to do if you want REAL reform is to repeal McCarran-Ferguson. That will break up the insurance fiefdoms that exist around the country, for starters.

            As far as your last comment, there is no such thing as a “free market” and never has been. People are too corrupt. And the statement “limited government” is meaningless twaddle. Limited to WHAT? Want to tear up all the stop signs and guard rails? When you make statements like that, it shows that you’re not a thinking person, but someone who desperately wishes to indentify with an idea without having to define what it is.

            This is what a lot of American voters do today, which is why voters living in impoverished sewers like Mississippi, Alabama and Louisiana vote Republican.

          • “Just remember: we haven’t had a “free market” in health care since WWII ended, and anyone who thinks so is delusional. ”

            “there is no such thing as a “free market” and never has been. ”

            “And the statement “limited government” is meaningless twaddle. Limited to WHAT? Want to tear up all the stop signs and guard rails? When you make statements like that, it shows that you’re not a thinking person, ”

            I think just fine thank you. Perhaps you should have thought a bit more before you posted those contradictory statements above.

            You are just another arrogant liberal who thinks that people are too corrupt, stupid and easily fooled to be able to make their own decisions and as such the government (run by people like you of course) should step in and make those decisions for them. Shows how little thinking liberals like you actually do.

          • They’re not contradictory at all. You want to reduce your entire political template to a few meaningless slogans, you go right ahead. The candidates are waiting.

            Again: there is no such thing as a “free market,” and best of all, the US Chamber of Commerce and it’s paymasters will make certain of it.

            Today’s self professed “conservative” knows nothing about business.

          • max: “Again: companies should focus on making things and providing services, not running benefits operations. ”

            Who are you to tell companies how they should compensate their employees? If a company and its employees desire to take advantage of the group buying power a company possesses, who are you to tell them they should not do that?

            max: “The first thing to do if you want REAL reform is to repeal McCarran-Ferguson. ”

            I agree that McCarran-Ferguson should be repealed. That’s an uphill battle, though. Physicians will fight like hell to maintain the state mandates which McCarran-Ferguson allows.

          • “I agree that McCarran-Ferguson should be repealed. That’s an uphill battle, though. Physicians will fight like hell to maintain the state mandates which McCarran-Ferguson allows.”

            So where’s your “free market,” pal? You just admitted that a trade protection society controls the market it services and exercises pricing controls over it.

            I just love it when people accuse ME of “being contradictory.”

            BTW, McCarran regulates INSURANCE, not doctors.

            “Who are you to tell companies how they should compensate their employees? If a company and its employees desire to take advantage of the group buying power a company possesses, who are you to tell them they should not do that?”

            And if the company DOESN’T, than what does that mean for employees who work at firms that don’t? Drop dead?

            Let’s remember our history. Health insurance was provided by firms as a way to attract scarce labor during WWII, since their were wage and price controls in effect. The insurance was used as a “run around” and that is whay caused the dysfunctional UNFREE marketr we have now.

          • The “slogans” as you call them, are meaningless only to you as you have no clue about free markets and limited government.

            Free markets don’t exist because the US chamber of commerce and their paymasters won’t allow them to exist? It is only people like you who understand business?

            Seems like you are reducing your argument to a few stupid liberal slogans.

          • max planck,

            First, you are definitely not my pal,

            Second, I never, ever argued that the market for health care in the U.S. was a free market. In fact, I’ve argued just the opposite a number of times at this blog and at Cafe Hayek.

            BTW, it is the provision of McCarran Ferguson allowing states to regulate insurance companies which enables those states to mandate certain medical procedures be covered by health insurance companies. That’s where doctors enter the equation of McCarran Ferguson.

            Finally, you do not know the history of health insurance as well as you think you do. Employer based health insurance plans were growing in number before WWII. Many people believe – and I’m one of them – that employer based health insurance plans would have continued to grow without the help of the federal government.

          • You’re wrong, Dewey. Private health insurance of the kind we have now and was made popular during the war years was almost unknown before WWII. FDR wanted a program of national health insurance, but the AMA defeated the effort, and of course, its easy to see why. The medical profession has been overpaying itself for decades. My point was that ACA doesn’t make the health insurance market any less “free” than it was before, contrary to the wingnut banshees.

            As I said: McCarran Ferguson regulates INSURANCE.

            Your mention of Hayek is interesting. Hayek believed that if Atlee was elected and a national health system were put in, that it would establish Nazism in Britain. There are millions of Hayek groupies out there, but like all mortal men, they are prisoners of their own time and their own experience. Needless to say, the UK is still a Parliamentary Democracy, warts and all.

          • Max Planck, I am definitely not wrong. Employer based health insurance started to expand rapidly in the thrtee years prior to the start of WWII. By 1941 about 8 million Americans were covered by Blue Cross Blue Shield and about 6 million more by private health insurance. According to Prof Melissa Thomasson of Miami University:

            “The success of Blue Cross and Blue Shield showed just how easily adverse selection problems could be overcome: by focusing on providing health insurance only to groups of employed workers. This would allow commercial insurance companies to avoid adverse selection because they would insure relatively young, healthy people who did not individually seek health insurance. After viewing the success of Blue Cross and Blue Shield, commercial health insurance companies began to move rapidly into the health insurance market. As shown in Figure 1, the market for health insurance exploded in size in the 1940s, growing from a total enrollment of 20,662,000 in 1940 to nearly 142,334,000 in 1950 (Health Insurance Institute 1961, Source Book, p. 10). As the Superintendent of Insurance in New York, Louis H. Pink, noted in 1939″

            There is no question that federal government policies influenced the growth of employer-based health insurance. But that growth definitely started before those government policies were implemented.

    • I think all the GMI people are long gone from Darden, but even a sloppy operator can see that hiring full-timers with extra costs is a losing proposition. Now, if the labor market were to tighten up again this will be more difficult, but for the foreseeable future, it’s not going to be tight, and the burdens of Obamacare will be a major drag on growth and employment. Those who just itch to have government “call the shots” always seem surprised when they end up missing the target.

      Obamacare has been a catalyst for just about every company to reexamine their strategies with respect to benefits, full-time/part-time and contracting staff. But then it seems pretty likely that migrating lots of people to government healthcare was the unadvertised objective anyway.

      • Not so long gone, Sam. Joe Lee managed the first Red Lobster way back in 1968. He was president of Red Lobster and CEO of General Mills Restaurant Group (which became Darden) from 1975 until his retirement in 2006. The culture and systems Joe put in place are still there today.

  2. From the article on refrigerator size:

    “While no empirical data exist that link larger appliances to the obesity epidemic in the U.S.”

    My personal observations lead me to believe that upper middle income and upper income families own the very large refrigerators referred to in the article. In my north Texas suburb, such families are not the ones who are obese. Rather, the wealthier families tend to buy healthier foods at Whole Foods Market and work out at Lifetime Fitness.

    • Yes, and also I doubt house sizes became bigger from Americans becoming fatter:

      “Average U.S. house size grew from 983 sq. ft. in 1950 to 2,377 sq. ft. in 2010…Home size peaked in 2007 at 2,521 sq. ft.”

    • 2009 obesity rates among adults aged 25 and over:

      college graduates – 28%
      some college or tech school – 42%
      high school graduates – 40%
      less than high school – 38%

      Source: http://www.healthypeople.gov, a website of the U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services

      Who do you think can afford giant refrigerators: college graduates or high school graduates/dropouts?

      • Dude, look at those statistics, and try revising them back to the standards of even 25 years ago.

        There aren’t more obese people. There are more idiot bureaucrats classifying non-obese people as obese to help justify their future jobs as fat-control czars.

        • Igotbupkis: “There aren’t more obese people.”

          Well, I disagree. I’ve seen both private and public studies which have convinced me that Americans are much fatter than they were 40 or 50 years ago. I’ve also been alive for about six decades, and I’ve very clearly seen the changes.

          I do not favor government intrusion in our lives. You should know that if you have read many of my comments. However, given that voters have allowed government to be responsible for the health care of senior citizens, I do understand that it is in the taxpayers’ interest to promote healthy lifestyles. Promoting healthy lifestyles does not mean restrictions on freedom, of course.

  3. NOW WONDER WHY THERE WAS A NEAR-600,000 JUMP IN PART-TIMERS THAT BROUGHT THE UR RATE DOWN TO 7.8%.

    Places like Darden, with its 180,000 employees, are cutting the jobs in half and creating part timer workers that will save them big healthcare bucks.

    Thank you Barack Hussein Obama. You created two jobs out of one and both new part-time workers now make half as much !!

  4. From the Las Vegas Review-Journal:

    1. ‘”The drop in sales is partly attributable to declining inventory. The number of homes available for sale on the Multiple Listing Service fell 23.3 percent from a year ago to 16,775 in September. Of those, only 3,943 are available without a pending or contingent offer, down 63 percent from a year ago.”

    2. “With fewer homes for sale, list prices are increasing. Median price of new listings jumped 19.3 percent to $155,000. That’s up $25,000 from a year ago.”

    3. “Median prices climbed in September for the eighth straight month to $140,000, up 1.4 percent from the previous month and up 13.5 percent from a year ago.”

    • You’re also using the very area where the WORST peak to trough pricing occurred, so the price bounce here is more attenuated. Nevada, Arizona, California and Florida- the so-called “Sand States”- had peak to trough price swings hovering around 60%. Where I live, we barely hit a 15% decline.

      The geography is important for another reason- it proves the abject stupidity of hanging the housing crisis on CRA, when the biggest problems in housing occurred in overbuilt retirement communities.

      But never mind. A moron never gets his fill.

      • Yeah…blame Andrew Cuomo and HUD’s 70% home ownership mandate and the “or else” quotas that they imposed on banks to make mortgages available to folks who had no jobs, no assets and no way to repay the loans. Blame the libs and Dems who replaced proven lending standards with a “feel-good” social agenda. Blame Dodd and Frank who let Fannie go crazy with 30% leverage in order to buy the very subprime junk that they helped to create while repeatedly assuring America that everything was “just fine.”

        Blame the nutty and wacky libs who came close to destroying the global economy.

      • max.-

        “But never mind. A moron never gets his fill.”

        and you prove it every time you jump in here with unfounded and factually inaccurate nonsense.

        the worst markets in 2009 were not retirement communities. they were places like fresno, stockton, detroit and new york.

        http://www.nuwireinvestor.com/articles/25-worst-real-estate-markets-in-the-united-states-53546.aspx

        you just make up your facts to fit your thesis, and as a result, have no idea what you are talking about.

        • Excuse me: if you’re going to use a chart, PICK THE RIGHT ONE. I am well versed on this subject, and probably better thann 99.5% of the country, whether you like it or not.

          Please see the following link, and note the second chart showing figures from 2006 (peak) to 2009 (for most parts of the country, the trough)

          http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/07/peak-to-trough-case-shiller-and-car.html

          That is Case-Schiller data. Please make a note of the FIRST FOUR cities noted, and let me know how that conflicts with the data I have presented.

          Also note where New York is. It may also interest you to know that today, (this is 2012) the vacancy rate in Manhattan is now below 1%, and prices for condos have skyrocketed, and some of the outer boroughs have reported sharp increases as well.

          Anytime you, Mr. Wallison, Mr. Pinto, or anyone else who isn’t a racist troll (you know who you are) wants to discuss the housing crisis with facts and data, I am ready willing and able. But don’t ever question my knowledge on this subject, or worse, accuse me of making things up. That’s the AEI’s job.

  5. I wonder if Obamacare was the driving factor behind the reported 800,000 surge in part time employees? Did full time employment actually dive?

  6. 2. Completely meaningless BS. “Consumers’ average home price change expectation is 1.5 percent, consistent with recent periods and marking nearly a full year in which home price expectations have been positive.” What do consumer’s expectations have to do with anything? Respondents to a survey can now predict the future? Perhaps they should predict the winner of the Breeder’s Cup Classic, too. The Fannie Mae survey is a waste of telephone bandwidth.

  7. From NewsBusters: CEO Threatens to Fire Employees If Obama Is Reelected and Raises Taxes

    (skip)

    So, when you make your decision to vote, ask yourself, which candidate understands the economics of business ownership and who doesn’t? Whose policies will endanger your job? Answer those questions and you should know who might be the one capable of protecting and saving your job. While the media wants to tell you to believe the “1 percenters” are bad, I’m telling you they are not. They create most of the jobs. If you lose your job, it won’t be at the hands of the “1%”; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country.

    You see, I can no longer support a system that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, so will your opportunities. If that happens, you can find me in the Caribbean sitting on the beach, under a palm tree, retired, and with no employees to worry about…

  8. I’d love to know how many people below the ‘middle class’ income level characterize themselves as ‘enviornmentalists’. I’d bet its very low. And that is an irony because these are the people that suffer from the quasi-tax (making it very regressive). In California it is certainly true with gasoline at the highest price in the country and the mandate for utilities to use ‘green’ and expensive energy. Funny, how the people that the liberals say they want to help get hurt the most under their rule. Its really true in education.

    • Gas prices are high in California due to refinery shut downs, and the fact our distribution network ensures that some people will pay higher prices than others. We are now exporting 2.6 million gallons of gas a day, and when the southern part of Keystone is finished, that number will increase substantially. (Again, the big Keystone joke is that none of the production is for us.)

      How many of these price spikes- which are completely decorrelated from the price or physical supply of oil, do people have to live through to see this isn’t an “enviromental” issue?

      Gasoline consumption in this country is plummeting, and it goes down every year as more efficient vehicles replace older cars, and telecommuting becomes more common. I see the Romney press hacks on Twitter crowing about this. Never mind there’s nothing Romney can or will do anything about it either.

      • I think gas prices in California are high because of the boutique blend mandated by the California government. If California used the same gasoline blends as most of the rest of the nation, then the cost of a California refinery shutdown would be spread across the entire nation.

  9. Obesity rates have more to do with excess food stamps than a bigger fridge. In the 80′s, the welfare recipients were leaner and healthier. At grocery lines, the fullest grocery cart is from somebody paying with a food stamp debit card.

  10. }}}} Could 3-D printing completely eliminate the market for a globalized supply chain? Maybe.

    Possible, but it means the system has to be completely restructured, and a heck of a lot of techniques have to be revised.

    There are a lot of auto parts you won’t be able to “3d print” using any existing technique for that. A bearing race with bearings in it, for example. MUCH too freaking hard for anything those machines can currently do.

    You should also grasp the mechanics of CAD-controlled milling and lathe machines, which do similar things to the 3d printers, except the opposite direction.

    Kinda like
    Q: How do you sculpt an elephant?
    A: Simple. Start with a big block and cut away everything that doesn’t look like an elephant.

    Those CAN handle the hard metals, with the correct bits, and hence are, for at least the foreseeable future, the source for any such parts.

  11. Max Planck, I am not wrong. The growth of private health insurance started before WWII. Blue Cross and Blue Shield were thriving by 1940. Commercial insurance companies entered the employer-based health insurance market at the end of the 1930s. By 1942, when the government policies you refer to were enacted, 20 million Americans were already covered by private health insurance, primarily employer-based plans.

    Melissa Thomasson, Miami University, explains:

    “The success of Blue Cross and Blue Shield showed just how easily adverse selection problems could be overcome: by focusing on providing health insurance only to groups of employed workers. This would allow commercial insurance companies to avoid adverse selection because they would insure relatively young, healthy people who did not individually seek health insurance. After viewing the success of Blue Cross and Blue Shield, commercial health insurance companies began to move rapidly into the health insurance market. As shown in Figure 1, the market for health insurance exploded in size in the 1940s, growing from a total enrollment of 20,662,000 in 1940 to nearly 142,334,000 in 1950 (Health Insurance Institute 1961, Source Book, p. 10). As the Superintendent of Insurance in New York, Louis H. Pink, noted in 1939″

    Federal government policies enacted in the 1940s did influence the growth of employer-based health insurance. But that growth started before those policies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>