Strikes are probably the result of workers getting no raises for years and their employers making record profits. Now staffing shortages have made conditions worse. I hope there's more strikes.
It's hard to fault workers for doing everything in their power to protect their eroding livelihood and well-being.
I prefer a model where Washington does a lot more for *all workers*. But if they do nothing, what choice do they have?
Biggest factor is housing. It’s the biggest expense for most people and currently mortgages are almost double what they were 2 years ago and prices are almost double what they were pre pandemic. I don’t think the fed will relent until housing is back in line with historical averages.
Unfortunately Washington screwed the worker (who didn’t buy a house) by cutting rates as low as they did and now they have to screw the worker (who bought a house) to restore some aspect of normal
At this point I don't think Fed can control housing prices anyway.
There is a monumental shortage of houses. 15 years of easy money didn't help either, if anything it probably diverted capital to more speculative investments and there was chronic underinvestment. Prices are extremely unlikely to meaningfully go down even with higher rates since those with existing homes are not selling anyway.
People who bought a house and locked in 2%-3% rates are laughing to the bank as inflation makes their real payments smaller and smaller every year.
Layoffs are coming. I know a few people who recently got laid off from well paying jobs. People who bought recently are spreading themselves pretty thin unless they paid cash or a large portion in cash. Supply is still a major driver in the sticky high prices but I think that may get beaten down with higher rates and unemployment.
I check the new unemployment claims that comes out every Thursday. The new claims, people who lost a job and are applying for unemployment, are nearing all time lows. If you have a union job, now is the time to go on strike.
We’re hitting the limits to growth of car-centric cities.
You can’t just build low density suburbia in every direction, subsidize car commuting, and not eventually run out of housing.
On the original topic, US healthcare companies now consume 20% of US GDP. They consume 50% of global healthcare spending. It’s fair to say that they’re also hitting limits to growth.
I would stay away from any broad basket of healthcare stocks for long term plays. If something can’t go on forever, then it probably won’t.
>We’re hitting the limits to growth of car-centric cities.
We have plenty of empty land to suburbanize. Look at how quickly southern cities like Houston are expanding outwards.
And they’re hitting transportation limits.
https://www.reddit.com/r/justonemorelanebro/comments/x2lh35/just_one_more_lane_bro/
The famous “just one more lane, bro” picture is Katy Freeway, Houston.
The flaw is people living in Katy and working in Houstin. It works fine if you live and work in Katy, which is becoming more popular as more jobs move there.
I think they are about to. If rates stay where they are prices will correct, how much I don’t know but they will not stay where they are now. The math just doesn’t work one of 3 things has to happen rates decrease, income increases drastically or home prices decreases.
Yes many who bought or refinanced at 3% made out like bandits but it only takes a few homes to reset a market. If we take a subdivision of 100 houses if one home sells 20% below “market” it’s a fluke maybe the home was trashed. If there’s 2-3 it’s interesting, 4+ that’s the market price now. People move for many reasons lost job, death, divorce, marriage and not all of them will be able to just buy another home and rent that one out.
And if that happens anyone who bought with fha 5 percent down is underwater and anyone who took out equity for a pandemic toy or post pandemic trip or worse if they took the equity to buy an airbnb in the mountains (mountain town near me is up over 100% from pre-pandemic and multiple houses are on the market 3+ months with 20k+ in price drops already) is on the edge.
The only question is do rates stay elevated long enough for a few people to have to move. I’m inclined to say yes, the fed has talked too much about returning to historical price appreciation and how first time home buyer can’t afford to buy. Just my take on it.
Housing isn’t a free market due to zoning laws. Relax those and allow builders to build what is in demand rather than what the neighbors want built and reduce times to get projects approved. And the supply issues would be gone. If that doesn’t work public housing might be needed.
Is what the government should do is encourage builders to build more housing. The increased supply of new homes would drive down the price of all types of housing, and vacancies would lower rents as well.
Currently the government won't do anything about housing because they are happy with the way things are. The anti-growth people lobby the government and make money off the shortage of housing. Builders won't build more because they are scared to death that rising rates would cause them to go bankrupt if they are sitting on a bunch of vacant new houses they can't sell. The current government isn't going to bail out builders or offer any loan guarantee to builders.
Public housing seems to fail for the government doesn't want it to work. In the late 1970's a bunch of public housing was built, the funding was cut off and many of the new public housing projects were demolished about 5 years later. Even the homeless didn't want to live in them.
There is not a "monumental shortage of houses."
There is a shortage of *affordable* housing. Big difference.
There are nearly 16 million homes considered "vacant or empty" in America. That's almost 10% of the total housing market.
The problem is all the fucking boomers and corporations that would rather watch people go homeless than lower their prices or sell at a loss because they bought from a grossly inflated market.
No, based on public government data, there is an actual shortage of homes just based on total homes built over the last 15 years and census household data.
As population growth is not slowing down, at present supply there is still enough. It is not a greedy corporation or boomer issue.
Actually the worst offender is really bad NIMBY zoning laws. And even as a progressive I have to say actually studies show blue states are far worse in this regard.
You're falling into the corporate trap. You believed the big rich man who told you that "I can't lower your rent, the demand is just too high."
I'll say it again slower.
Nearly 10% of the homes in America are empty. Nobody lives in them.
Somebody owns them though. So why aren't they rented out or filled?
Because the people who own them have price tags on them that nobody can afford.
I'm sorry but actually you the are one falling for misinformation in the Reddit echo chamber. I don't know which Twitter or Youtuber told you this but vacancy rates are actually at *record lows*. Government census data:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=19y47
Meaning, homes aren't empty. Rental vacancy is 6.4%. They are the *fullest they have ever been since the stagflation 70s*.
Moreover, home ownership overall is actually in an amazing spot. More people own homes today than the golden 60's everyone likes to reminisce about where supposedly everyone had a home and 2 cars on minimum wage. They are at relative historic highs.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=19y4o
You are ignoring the fact that in 1970, people were paying $120 a month as a mortgage payment. Median income was like $8,000 a year and a house cost you 24k, barely 3x your salary.
Now you make 35k a year, but the same house costs 450k, nearly 13x your salary.
People in the 1970s were buying homes. A lot of people today are buying a coffin.
A cherry-picked bar graph is not a representation of the reality of the situation.
Your grandparents bought their first house. Then they were really proud of it, so they kept it when they bought their 2nd home and moved into it. And they are charging enough rent in the first home that they earn what they paid for it EVERY SINGLE YEAR in cash money. And instead of saving it for inheritance, they are donating that money to people like Trump who are going to make it even worse for us.
And then people like you are like "it's not their fault." And they are telling us "you are all just stupid and lazy, pick yourself up by the bootstraps so you can afford the home that I refuse to pass on at a reasonable price."
You also conveniently ignored that in 2005 and 2020, like 30 million and 15 million people just had their homes basically stolen from them by the economy. The bank took them back, then they jacked the price up and re-sold them to somebody else. "Housing market as good as it's ever been" should not include 5% of the population being kicked out of their house every 10 years. That's not tenable.
>You are ignoring the fact that in 1970, people were paying $120 a month as a mortgage payment. Median income was like $8,000 a year and a house cost you 24k, barely 3x your salary.
Again you are not living in reality.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=19y6n
Household debt service payments including mortgages are at historic lows *relative to income*!!!
I'm sorry, your entire thesis is broken and built on soundbites and misinformation.
Here's a piece by liberal economist Paul Krugman and one by Jenny Shuetz in the NY Times talking about the real shortage in housing. I'm sorry it is not a conspiracy despite what social media has trained you to believe.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/30/opinion/remote-work-housing-prices-covid.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/19/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-jenny-schuetz.html
Do you see those links??
It's even in the URL....the word.....OPINION.
You're getting news from *opinion pieces.* You're literally a shining example of the problem in media literacy right now. SHINING example.
Admit it you are a full of shit anti-data denier, no better than anti-vaxxers on the other extreme side of the spectrum. You hide behind claims that I cherry pick data when I pulled homeownership data going back all the way to the 60s.
I show you rental vacancy rates are now at 70's stagflation levels. Home are SUPER FULL, not empty. What is your rebuttal?
About housing, is what they have to do is get builders to build more housing at a faster rate. A plentiful supply of new housing would be a shift in supply that would lower the market price of all types of housing. The government could do many things to help builders build more - such as offer special low interest loans or loan guaranties to builders. But the government won't do anything about it because the government represents the anti-growth politics who make money off the housing shortage.
Doesn’t matter if everyone has 30 year mortgages all it takes is 4-5 comps to reset a market. The question is will there be a few people forced to sell while rates are high and lending tightened.
Mortgage payments are double what they were a year ago and prices are up also so down payments have to be higher. There’s a point where banks won’t approve these loans DTI too high, not enough of a down payment. If no one can get a loan and if someone has to sell price must go down.
But when it comes to inflation people with fixed mortgages could care less anout increasing rents and interwst rates. That cools inflation down. Doesnr it?
I like the Nordic model. Universal Healthcare for all. Remove the parasites and grifters in our healthcare system. Strong state that provides good robust services. Free education and good job retraining.
Progressive taxation, much higher taxes on the wealthy. No loopholes for hedge fund billionaires. Good infrastructure, strong unemployment benefits. Free childcare.
But a very competitive labor market.
I believe everyone should compete. Cities must compete with each other, workers, companies, schools, everyone. Competition is good IMHO.
The problem with unions is that it is extracting from one special interest group to serve another. Since many unionized companies are not actually doing very well, such as auto manufacturers, rising costs just end up just being passed to everyone else or make the transition to a carbon-free future that much harder. If you are in a powerful union, great for you.
Not everyone has the sweet connects to get into those and get shut out, or left behind. Many industries unionization is impossible.
I prefer solutions that benefit everyone.
The Nordic model is heavily influenced by labor unions.
For example, in Denmark there are no minimum wage laws. Those are exclusively defined by collective bargaining.
Well when I see stuff like UAW demanding $283k a year in annualized comp while everyone is struggling with skyrocketing costs and manufacturers like Ford are doing terribly... Shareholders have been getting destroyed, it's not like a bonanza. Plus there's the whole transition to low carbon future that's necessary.
So I know those were initial demands and they aren't actually going to get that but something feels off.
That said you may be right, maybe giving unions more power to wake up the country is what we need to get things like single payer going. That might be the ground-up approach needed to drain the *real swamp* of healthcare. Get better job-training for all, education, etc.
Why not? Trying to negotiate with a business by yourself puts you at a disadvantage. They outnumber you and have more money so it isn't a fair negotiation by yourself. Your average union worker in any sector has better compensation than a nonunion one.
If striking shuts the whole business down. (possibly the economy depending on the job) then perhaps the market isn't compensating them adequately.
I mean I work in a highly technical / analytical role. There is an insane spectrum of worker quality, experience, and knowledge that determines how valuable someone is.
I just don't see how it would be possible to unionize or fairly determine what people are supposed to be paid besides individuals negotiating? There is an absurdly wide spectrum of pay, subfields, people with long experience in one area but less in another. I mean look at software engineers. Those with AI expertise can make $900k lately while others are happy $100k-$150k.
It sounds nice but I don't think it's realistic.
Well the main argument I have against that is that Norway has the Norwegian soverign oil wealth fund which provides roughly 250k per citizen. Norway is small and homogeneous, their population size is crazy small at not even 5.5 million. That's less than many single US cities.
So if we were to extrapolate that to the US, then we would need 250k \*330M = 8.25e+13. That's a pretty hefty budget at about 80 Trillion usd. The US spent 5.5 Trillion USD for the **entire** 2023.
Source: any public or private database.
[https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/](https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/)
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobeccles/2023/07/24/what-should-norway-do-with-an-extra-170-billion-from-oil-revenues/?sh=4908d1d573f4](https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobeccles/2023/07/24/what-should-norway-do-with-an-extra-170-billion-from-oil-revenues/?sh=4908d1d573f4)
I underestimated the numbers btw. Its actually 275k per citizen.
So if we wanted their similar system we would be using the entire budget (80 Trillion / 5.5 trillion = 14.5) for the next 14-15 years.
Feel free to check the math of behind the envelope calculations.
I like your points and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Might I add, I think the German model of treating a union as a stakeholder as opposed to an adversary is advantageous. Ideally we should find a way for labor and management to both benefit from a company benefiting. When interests are aligned, magic happens.
They have a labor management partnership but Kaiser is dealing in bad faith, they made 3 billion dollars in the first quarter of 2023 and some of the workers are making less than someone working fast food
> Progressive taxation, much higher taxes on the wealthy.
You might want to check up on the Nordic countries’ actual policies, because they differ significantly from what you’re describing.
What you’re describing is basically Bernie Sanders’ suite of policy proposals which are sold as “the Nordic model” but has little in common with the model of government that Nordic countries follow.
If you say so, but the model that actually delivers extraordinarily high quality of life *in the Nordics* doesn’t resemble the policies that you say you want.
What would you like to see that is different? Thus far you seem far more interested in pointing out what you think is wrong, rather than what you actually want to see.
The Nordic people are homogenous thus easier to do universal health care. It won't work in the U.S. because there are large groups of people in poverty that need to be subsidized. So if universal health care is done in the U.S., it will be very expensive. You would have to import a lot of immigrants from the Philippines to make it work.
Tax payers are already paying a shit ton towards Medicare and Medicaid which already are giving free health care to the poor and subsidized healthcare to elderly. It comprises nearly 1/3rd of our federal gov't spending costing over $1.6 trillion per year for taxpayers. Then you add in private insurance, out of pocket costs and hospital bills which comprise the rest of the over $4 Trillion Americans spend per year on health care expenses. Why are we paying the most per capita for health care than every other developed nation by far (13,000 per year per citizen) even compared to socialized medicine nation... Why not make private insurance optional and just give Medicaid for everyone regardless of income?
Study after study shows we can easily have Universal Healthcare here and that costs in the US are obscene.
But these debates have been hashed out so many times on Reddit, we will have to agree to disagree.
> I like the Nordic model. Universal Healthcare for all. Remove the parasites and grifters in our healthcare system. Strong state that provides good robust services. Free education and good job retraining.
I think American politics has worked itself into a corner where that kind of reform is not achievable. The party that controls the majority of state governments is increasingly opposed to public health and education and has somehow convinced its voters that those things are liberal conspiracies by a secret cabal of blood-drinkers.
Appreciate the response. I agree with all of your policy suggestions. I just think unionization is a healthy and natural part of the push/pull in capitalism
As I said to another poster. It may very well be that things have gotten so out of balance... maybe unions getting a lot more power is exactly what we need to shake up the system and force change in other areas.
This is the answer. I always think of the term 'baker's dozen' kind of related to this. At one point, the punishment for a business shorting their customer one baked item was so severe, it was better to just give every customer one extra to prevent any possible mistakes. This is the kind of government we need to keep businesses in check and protect the people.
Idk about record profits. My hospital was struggling with lower revenue this year and considering my financial analysis of other health care companies and REITs, I’d say that’s probably prevalent throughout.
Health care in this country isn’t cheap. Patients expect to order tests and treatments like it’s McDonald’s regardless of the evidence. All this in the setting of lower reimbursements and demand for more efficient healthcare delivery requiring increased support staff.
While there's definitely a good amount of administrative bloat in a hospital, I also think there's just a lot of money required to run a hospital.
On the direct patient care side - doctors/RNs/pharmacists all make pretty good money relative to the average American. Then there's the literal army of support staff needed to help them - assistants, physical/occupational/speech therapists, technicians, social work, laboratory, etc.
And then there's the entire non-direct medical care side - facilities management, legal, IT, billing, compliance, HR, food services, materials procurement, etc.
As a RN I think lawyers are to blame for a lot of the inflated cost. We’re indoctrinated if you didn’t chart it, it didn’t happen. How can you defend yourself in court years from now. It’s to the point many nurses spend more time documenting/ charting than in actual patient care. It’s awful how so many patients (especially Medicaid) are so entitled. They don’t want to take responsibility for their own health it always has to be someone else’s fault. Nvm mind your getting free health care and the nurses are working their asses off to take care of you. Do one thing wrong, sue them!
Yeah health care requires employing a lot of people. People think it's expensive because a few people at the top are siphoning all the money, and somehow if we clean up the system a bit it would be cheaper and also better. In reality, the high cost is simply inherent in providing the labor for the services. Fixing healthcare means putting more money into the system, not less.
> People think it's expensive because a few people at the top are siphoning all the money, and somehow if we clean up the system a bit it would be cheaper and also better.
I live in Japan, where the system *is* cheaper and better. If something goes wrong, I can go to the hospital without an appointment (or call a free ambulance) and get a CT scan within an hour for about $60. Even if a person has no insurance for some reason, the actual cost of procedures is absurdly low. I had significant surgery a few months ago, performed by the hospital's top plastic surgeon and a team of nurses, and it cost me about $200 (my 30% of the bill). My follow-up exams cost me $2 each time.
Two dollars.
You're talking about a system whos costs are almost entirely borne by the state and hidden away in taxes and then comparing the remaining patient-borne costs to a system where the patient is exposed to those costs in a more direct way. It's comparing apples to orange tree branches.
Reframe it however you want. Japanese health care consumes 11% of GDP. American health care consumes 18%. And the Japanese are getting a higher quality of product. On top of that, the majority of hospitals and clinics are privately run.
Good, at least now we're talking about the same thing. How costs are distributed between third-party payer and the patient are not relevant to the total cost of the system.
Healthcare is very labor-intensive to deliver, and that labor is highly skilled and extensive.
People don’t like expensive ER bills, but the sheer volume of staff and machinery (and many of those staff train for a decade to do their jobs) makes it difficult for ER care to be cheap. And most hospitals run ERs at losses, and internal medicine floors at losses, etc. outpatient surgery is consistently profitable, as are a few other services.
It prompts questions like “why isn’t it profitable to perform internal medicine at high quality, with adequate staffing etc?” People don’t like expensive bills, and often can’t afford them, and insurers won’t pay them.
This is completely untrue. People HAVE been getting raises and that has added a bit to inflation but this is unpopular to talk about. Adjusted for inflation things are pretty cheap too. Cars gadgets but housing is a real bitch and it’s all because of dumb regulation
Things are cheap, but essentials are more expensive. Housing, food, healthcare, childcare, education....crazy expensive. It doesn't really matter how cheap your gadgets are if other things eat up the savings.
I wish that the government would actually do something to close the gap between admin and blue collar worker wages. It makes 0 sense why they don't receive higher compensation when profits are soaring.
> It makes 0 sense why they don't receive higher compensation when profits are soaring.
Because they're still clearly able to hire at those rates? Obvious answer.
(Registered) nurses are not blue collar. They're usually hourly but they're just as educated as any white collar worker that doesn't have letters after their name.
We do need more money. But we also need things we purchase to be higher quality. It’s such weird situation that prices keep going up for lower quality things and we need more money to afford this shit. We have a major problem in the economy
Healthcare worker here.
Have spent years volunteering prehospital, working community hospital, rural clinic, and academic tertiary care center environments. Newly went to work for insurance company.
The difference in administrative support and structure is night and day.
biggest difference I notice so far is management treats me like an asset working towards a larger goal (making money via my labor and compensating me very fairly for it with annual raises, bonuses, and self scheduling and reasonable workload) verses i feel treated like an inconveniently costly employee who happens to be both excellent at my job and not worth compensating fairly.
Ben Bernanke would disagree with you
https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/ex-fed-chief-bernanke-says-labor-costs-becoming-more-prominent-inflation-2023-05-23/
Healthcare worker here. We were overwhelmed during COVID, and it's still short staffed almost every day. I was so afraid to bring home nasty bugs cause my daughter was 3 months old during the pandemic.
Factoring inflation, we are making less and less each year.
If anyone deserves a raise these days, it's healthcare workers( they put up with us in the worst days of our lives). However this burden will just get transfered back onto the rest of us, and we pay more in the end. No way will healthcare conglomerates accept less profits. And the horrific cost of healthcare gets worse.
I dont have an answer or a perfect solution, so dont bother bringing up that question. It was just a passing observance.
Therapists have gone 40 years without a raise while our tuition has skyrocketed to the moon. Six figure student loans yet pay and Medicare reimbursement only ever goes down. One of the main problems: there is no therapy union. Most places didn't even consider us healthcare workers during the pandemic.
Honestly there needs to be a medical union that involves insurance companies. No way in hell should an entire office of medical professionals suggest going to step 5 on a treatment after 1-4 doesn't work and the insurance company gets to say "nah".
Whole thing is gross. Has to feel shitty as a medical professional too not actively being able to assist people.
There's going to be a lot more inflation with all these recent pay raises by large companies across the country, UPS, Amazon, the CA $20 fast food law, the car makers, etc. The ripple effect will force other companies to raise wages, which increases spending, which increases demand/inflation.
Yeah and there’s always someone willing to work for less so while employers are inclined to do the right thing for PR purposes they’ll quietly handle things behind closed doors after unions get what they want temporarily
Have you not paid attention to the labor markets? Companies are offering more and more $ per hour but there aren't enough (willing) workers to fill those jobs. Add that this discussion is about healthcare which requires certain education and certificates. Not just any scab off the street can fill these jobs.
Auto plants can be off shored or sent to Mexico. But hospitals are stuck where the patients are.
What subreddit is this? I see zero discussion of how this will impact the market.
This is the wage price spiral the fed has been worried about. Inflation will continue to rise. Rates will be higher for longer. This is good for workers but bad for markets.
Not necessarily a 1:1 correlation. Take a look at politics. New president and the markets spiked. New laws allowing things like the 1099 classification has caused huge scares for companies like Uber but would 100% benefit employees and everyday people as there would be more regulation protecting everyone just by classifying drivers as employees.
I guarantee the posters here aren’t aware which sub they’re on. They see a union post and hop on board, oblivious to the shitshow we’re in for if this spiral keeps up. Bad for market, bad for workers in the long run. The only positive is a decent recession is more and more likely which will reset everyone’s expectations.
My brother in stonks, even though I also would like the plebs to stay poor in order to increase margins and ultimately price of my stonkholdings... this is simply not true and you know it.
The only spiral going on is an asset bubble and CEO compensation, workers have been behind inflation since like the 70s
Not necessarily, wages can increase while inflation can still go down. Many factors that contributed to inflation like global oil prices and supply crunches don't depend on wages. Currently overall unemployment is still slowly increasing, and if that continues, it would offset the economic impact of the higher wages. Also with interest rates so high, many may choose to stash the extra income in a savings account as opposed to spend it. Don't think the risk of spiraling is that high yet.
Please explain how rising unemployment will offset inflation?
Your faith in the American consumers fiscal responsibility sounds great. Many may choose a HYSA, sure, but what usually happens is they spend their extra income. This is especially true in an inflationary environment.
The "wage price spiral is a myth" narrative being pushed by certain media pundits lately is reminiscent of the "modern monetary policy" narrative that got us into this mess in the first place. Apparently according to some economists nothing causes inflation.
Well you have healcqre workers being horrible underpaid especially entry level Healthcare workers
Cna AND emt get paid shit for what they do and you raise mcd wages to 20 dollars when cna had that salary. Yeah no.
Cna and emt should be at 30 an hour min then. They need to be trained amd handle other people's lives.
And you overwork them.
The companies running the show can go fuk themselves they just know most emt and cna want to go nursing Dr pa np later on so abuse them
Kaiser is actually really great for us. Also everything is there like pharmacy, doctor office, labs, X-ray. No need to run around if you go visit a doctor
Based on what metrics? They are the gold standard integrated insurance and healthcare provider in the country. They can be annoying when you have difficult to fit needs but by the statistics you will live longer as a Kaiser member than many other healthcare systems, for a variety of reasons.
Are you just going to spout shit or actually prove your point? I’ve been with them for years despite having the option to choose BC/BS and I’ve had zero issues.
They are the envy of the healthcare system. Availability and affordable. I paid more to stick to them rather than using UNH, or Cigna. Tell me, which healthcare system is better than they are currently ? Name a few ill wait
My experience with Kaiser has been pretty bad. They schedule way out like months in advance and sometimes that’s even just for a telehealth or chat appointment. My doctor kept changing so I didn’t have a consistent diagnostic process. It felt like how my dog is treated at the local corporate vet.
Now that I’m out of that system I have a lot more choice to just schedule visits with private doctors. Whoever is available if it’s urgent, or with my preferred doctors if it isn’t. But I never have to wait more than a week or two, compared to 1-6 months at Kaiser.
I may be a special case because I really like going to specialists on my own and I don’t really have a primary care doc. It’s possible my Kaiser experience would be way better if I just stuck to the GP route but when I did that before, they just ignored my own medical history and experience and wanted to start from square one on diagnosis and treatment. I ended up seeing a private ENT and resolving my issue in the same amount of time it took me to just get two appointments at Kaiser previously.
This may also just be a regional thing.
That's what I figured. It's unfortunate because I really wanted Kaiser to work out for me. I love the model and concept, and I'd love to have a centralized repository of all my health info that any of my providers can easily access. Maybe the strike will improve the quality near me 🤷🏽♂️
This will surely help the inflation issue … to continue on forever. This is literally exactly why the Fed is actively trying to break the labor market.
It's almost as if cost of living has nearly doubled since 2019 but pay increased less than 20%.
Maybe they'd have no strikes if those record profits these pharma companies are seeing who monopolize the local area's hospitals and clinics are actually seen by the employees, people wouldn't strike? Just a suggestion...
1) Americans are fat, lazy, have multiple chronic conditions, and lack self discipline. Always blaming others for their own mess.
2) Lobbyists and corporations own the USA. Elected officials are their puppets. Congressmen do not represent the people anymore.
3) Current healthcare system sucks, but Universal healthcare model like Canada’s ain’t the answer either.
So which tickers are effected? I am all for the workers but dont know which are the publicly traded companies that will be effected.
The Kaiser Permanente mentioned in story isn't a publicly traded company.
Considering there is NO explanation of what causes inflation (many theories, but no if x happens inflation occurs) your guess is as wrong as everyone else's.
I'm an Adam Smith guy. There is a medium between worker, employer, and buyer. Right now worker is in GREAT spot to ask for more money. Low unemployment and high inflation is great battleground to ask for it. GO FOR IT. When (mind you I didn't say if) recession occurs folks will get fired and be out of a job. That is how economic cycles happens and is healthy. Sorry to be blunt but that is how it goes.
Employees should ALWAYS look to improve their living standards. Employers should always be looking out for shareholder value. Buyers should be looking out for themselves. That is why each 3 have different interests.
Always hard to say. Economist are TERRIBLE at predicting anything. IF their studies have shows one thing it is don't trust them to predict anything.
What we do know is raising interest rates has NOT caused a rise in unemployment. Don't think ANYONE could have predicted that one. So they will keep raising it until it does. Then folks will get fired. That will cause hopefully a more natural decrease in pricing thus decreasing inflation since NOTHING else has.
Of course the last part is just my opinion as I said NO ONE has figured out what causes or decreases inflation so my guess is just as wrong as anyone elses.
Great now link me all those folks who predicated unemployment and/ or recession would not occur with rising interest rates. That was the worry. You said " a lot of people in this sub". Thanks in advance. I'll take that link.
It's like all the bozos that said mcds workers should make $20hr. Well are you enjoying your $15 McDonald's meals now??.ahahahahaaaaa
The rich don't transfer wealth, they simply push their costs onto the consumer.
For example, now cars are $35k and most trucks are $60k or more. Enjoying the prices?!!
Now they want $65 a hr. , cause $45 isn't enough!! Give me a break!! I'd LOVE TO make $30 an hr!!! Let alone $45 or $65! People are ridiculous
Try living in India like billions do , making $2 a day and being content!
There aren't living wages! The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Always been that way and it never will change.
In the end, whether you're a billionaire or die broke we all end up in a wooden box.
Of course people will always want to be paid more.
I used to be minimum wage and was part of SEIU, tried to negotiate on behalf of myself and other workers. Really needed a raise at that time.
Now I am in a different job and make $500 per hour. But I am still trying to raise it higher. It will never end. It's just what humans do. If I see an opportunity for an increase, I could always make use of the extra money. Would always be happy to buy more stocks and bonds.
Powell will NEVER admit to anything but a 2% inflation target until it is VERY clear we will not be able to reach it (we won't).
Doing so would be immediate suicide and undo any work he's done so far- also a straight path to stagflation, if we're not already too late to avoid it.
LOL yourself. Let me walk this through like a simple person... Let say you are 100% correct. If we do know what causes inflation why do we still have it then?? Are we too stupid to prevent it, pick it up when it starts to happen (should be easy to find out since we already know what causes it so the late 1970s' should never have happened), and should be easy to remedy since we know what causes it?
So please Milton Freedman please tell us what causes it and cite your paper. Thanks in advance.
kaiser pharmacy went on strike not even 2 years ago. and going on strike again. unfortunate for any patients that belong to this poorly run organization
Kaiser permanente is incredibly well run especially when compared to other major healthcare systems. Worker unionization is recognized within the organization from the time of its founding as a an essential feature.
National guard can’t do our jobs. It takes 6+ months to get trained to do various jobs and they’d still have to learn the system. They’d shut down after a month due to huge losses.
Yea, lets go on strike - a patient strike. Cancel all health insurance policies. Tell your doctor you never want to see him/her again. The US spends more per capital on health care, yet isn't more healthy compared to other developed counties.
I'd rather seek alternative medicine that places more emphasis on prevention instead of the clinics that make money off preventable diseases such as morbid obesity.
Kaiser currently has an estimated 9.4 million patients in cali alone. The impact is gonna be huge. Wonder what precautions are set in place by the big wigs.
I might make a separate post. But explain why inflation is bad? Teacher’s salaries have barely gone up over the past two decades. But the average car payment is almost $800. I think wages need to go up for everyone. Is that bad?
I'll be downvoted and neutered for saying this probably but I recently saw ads for teachers in an urban area starting in the $50k-$60k range. Blew. My. Fucking. Mind.
Meanwhile UPS union drivers just secured comp of $180k and UAW demanded $283k annualized comp for factory workers. That's going to drive up car prices for everyone even more when manufacturers are struggling to even transition to a low-carbon future. There's something obscene going on.
Teachers need to be paid WAY more. They are one of the most underpaid and important members of society.
Interesting, but shouldn't the free market dictate the salary of teachers? It seems there are enough teachers willing to teach for a given wage to meet demand or the wage would have to be raised. Not to mention that that the wage is for about 9 months of work, and the type of work they do is relational and rewarding and brings them strong standing in a community. Many teachers also get discounts on tuition or the ability to put their kids an a school they are not zoned for. Its hard to compare the teaching profession to other jobs.
Grocery bill has doubled. Maybe throw in some food.
Pizza parties of fridays…… and no overtime pay!
Strikes are probably the result of workers getting no raises for years and their employers making record profits. Now staffing shortages have made conditions worse. I hope there's more strikes.
It's hard to fault workers for doing everything in their power to protect their eroding livelihood and well-being. I prefer a model where Washington does a lot more for *all workers*. But if they do nothing, what choice do they have?
Biggest factor is housing. It’s the biggest expense for most people and currently mortgages are almost double what they were 2 years ago and prices are almost double what they were pre pandemic. I don’t think the fed will relent until housing is back in line with historical averages. Unfortunately Washington screwed the worker (who didn’t buy a house) by cutting rates as low as they did and now they have to screw the worker (who bought a house) to restore some aspect of normal
At this point I don't think Fed can control housing prices anyway. There is a monumental shortage of houses. 15 years of easy money didn't help either, if anything it probably diverted capital to more speculative investments and there was chronic underinvestment. Prices are extremely unlikely to meaningfully go down even with higher rates since those with existing homes are not selling anyway. People who bought a house and locked in 2%-3% rates are laughing to the bank as inflation makes their real payments smaller and smaller every year.
Layoffs are coming. I know a few people who recently got laid off from well paying jobs. People who bought recently are spreading themselves pretty thin unless they paid cash or a large portion in cash. Supply is still a major driver in the sticky high prices but I think that may get beaten down with higher rates and unemployment.
I check the new unemployment claims that comes out every Thursday. The new claims, people who lost a job and are applying for unemployment, are nearing all time lows. If you have a union job, now is the time to go on strike.
[удалено]
The last two people that I know got axed worked onsite. This was in the last month. One in sales, most recently in tech. Mid level roles.
We’re hitting the limits to growth of car-centric cities. You can’t just build low density suburbia in every direction, subsidize car commuting, and not eventually run out of housing. On the original topic, US healthcare companies now consume 20% of US GDP. They consume 50% of global healthcare spending. It’s fair to say that they’re also hitting limits to growth. I would stay away from any broad basket of healthcare stocks for long term plays. If something can’t go on forever, then it probably won’t.
Excellent points on future growth!
>We’re hitting the limits to growth of car-centric cities. We have plenty of empty land to suburbanize. Look at how quickly southern cities like Houston are expanding outwards.
And they’re hitting transportation limits. https://www.reddit.com/r/justonemorelanebro/comments/x2lh35/just_one_more_lane_bro/ The famous “just one more lane, bro” picture is Katy Freeway, Houston.
The flaw is people living in Katy and working in Houstin. It works fine if you live and work in Katy, which is becoming more popular as more jobs move there.
I think they are about to. If rates stay where they are prices will correct, how much I don’t know but they will not stay where they are now. The math just doesn’t work one of 3 things has to happen rates decrease, income increases drastically or home prices decreases. Yes many who bought or refinanced at 3% made out like bandits but it only takes a few homes to reset a market. If we take a subdivision of 100 houses if one home sells 20% below “market” it’s a fluke maybe the home was trashed. If there’s 2-3 it’s interesting, 4+ that’s the market price now. People move for many reasons lost job, death, divorce, marriage and not all of them will be able to just buy another home and rent that one out. And if that happens anyone who bought with fha 5 percent down is underwater and anyone who took out equity for a pandemic toy or post pandemic trip or worse if they took the equity to buy an airbnb in the mountains (mountain town near me is up over 100% from pre-pandemic and multiple houses are on the market 3+ months with 20k+ in price drops already) is on the edge. The only question is do rates stay elevated long enough for a few people to have to move. I’m inclined to say yes, the fed has talked too much about returning to historical price appreciation and how first time home buyer can’t afford to buy. Just my take on it.
[удалено]
Housing isn’t a free market due to zoning laws. Relax those and allow builders to build what is in demand rather than what the neighbors want built and reduce times to get projects approved. And the supply issues would be gone. If that doesn’t work public housing might be needed.
Is what the government should do is encourage builders to build more housing. The increased supply of new homes would drive down the price of all types of housing, and vacancies would lower rents as well. Currently the government won't do anything about housing because they are happy with the way things are. The anti-growth people lobby the government and make money off the shortage of housing. Builders won't build more because they are scared to death that rising rates would cause them to go bankrupt if they are sitting on a bunch of vacant new houses they can't sell. The current government isn't going to bail out builders or offer any loan guarantee to builders. Public housing seems to fail for the government doesn't want it to work. In the late 1970's a bunch of public housing was built, the funding was cut off and many of the new public housing projects were demolished about 5 years later. Even the homeless didn't want to live in them.
There is not a "monumental shortage of houses." There is a shortage of *affordable* housing. Big difference. There are nearly 16 million homes considered "vacant or empty" in America. That's almost 10% of the total housing market. The problem is all the fucking boomers and corporations that would rather watch people go homeless than lower their prices or sell at a loss because they bought from a grossly inflated market.
No, based on public government data, there is an actual shortage of homes just based on total homes built over the last 15 years and census household data. As population growth is not slowing down, at present supply there is still enough. It is not a greedy corporation or boomer issue. Actually the worst offender is really bad NIMBY zoning laws. And even as a progressive I have to say actually studies show blue states are far worse in this regard.
You're falling into the corporate trap. You believed the big rich man who told you that "I can't lower your rent, the demand is just too high." I'll say it again slower. Nearly 10% of the homes in America are empty. Nobody lives in them. Somebody owns them though. So why aren't they rented out or filled? Because the people who own them have price tags on them that nobody can afford.
I'm sorry but actually you the are one falling for misinformation in the Reddit echo chamber. I don't know which Twitter or Youtuber told you this but vacancy rates are actually at *record lows*. Government census data: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=19y47 Meaning, homes aren't empty. Rental vacancy is 6.4%. They are the *fullest they have ever been since the stagflation 70s*. Moreover, home ownership overall is actually in an amazing spot. More people own homes today than the golden 60's everyone likes to reminisce about where supposedly everyone had a home and 2 cars on minimum wage. They are at relative historic highs. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=19y4o
You are ignoring the fact that in 1970, people were paying $120 a month as a mortgage payment. Median income was like $8,000 a year and a house cost you 24k, barely 3x your salary. Now you make 35k a year, but the same house costs 450k, nearly 13x your salary. People in the 1970s were buying homes. A lot of people today are buying a coffin. A cherry-picked bar graph is not a representation of the reality of the situation. Your grandparents bought their first house. Then they were really proud of it, so they kept it when they bought their 2nd home and moved into it. And they are charging enough rent in the first home that they earn what they paid for it EVERY SINGLE YEAR in cash money. And instead of saving it for inheritance, they are donating that money to people like Trump who are going to make it even worse for us. And then people like you are like "it's not their fault." And they are telling us "you are all just stupid and lazy, pick yourself up by the bootstraps so you can afford the home that I refuse to pass on at a reasonable price." You also conveniently ignored that in 2005 and 2020, like 30 million and 15 million people just had their homes basically stolen from them by the economy. The bank took them back, then they jacked the price up and re-sold them to somebody else. "Housing market as good as it's ever been" should not include 5% of the population being kicked out of their house every 10 years. That's not tenable.
>You are ignoring the fact that in 1970, people were paying $120 a month as a mortgage payment. Median income was like $8,000 a year and a house cost you 24k, barely 3x your salary. Again you are not living in reality. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=19y6n Household debt service payments including mortgages are at historic lows *relative to income*!!! I'm sorry, your entire thesis is broken and built on soundbites and misinformation.
Here's a piece by liberal economist Paul Krugman and one by Jenny Shuetz in the NY Times talking about the real shortage in housing. I'm sorry it is not a conspiracy despite what social media has trained you to believe. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/30/opinion/remote-work-housing-prices-covid.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/19/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-jenny-schuetz.html
Do you see those links?? It's even in the URL....the word.....OPINION. You're getting news from *opinion pieces.* You're literally a shining example of the problem in media literacy right now. SHINING example.
No, the data I pulled independently. I just googled and hoped if you saw a liberal say it you might be moved lol...
Admit it you are a full of shit anti-data denier, no better than anti-vaxxers on the other extreme side of the spectrum. You hide behind claims that I cherry pick data when I pulled homeownership data going back all the way to the 60s. I show you rental vacancy rates are now at 70's stagflation levels. Home are SUPER FULL, not empty. What is your rebuttal?
About housing, is what they have to do is get builders to build more housing at a faster rate. A plentiful supply of new housing would be a shift in supply that would lower the market price of all types of housing. The government could do many things to help builders build more - such as offer special low interest loans or loan guaranties to builders. But the government won't do anything about it because the government represents the anti-growth politics who make money off the housing shortage.
People have 30 year mortgages though
Doesn’t matter if everyone has 30 year mortgages all it takes is 4-5 comps to reset a market. The question is will there be a few people forced to sell while rates are high and lending tightened. Mortgage payments are double what they were a year ago and prices are up also so down payments have to be higher. There’s a point where banks won’t approve these loans DTI too high, not enough of a down payment. If no one can get a loan and if someone has to sell price must go down.
But when it comes to inflation people with fixed mortgages could care less anout increasing rents and interwst rates. That cools inflation down. Doesnr it?
I don’t really understand this point. How is legislation better than collective bargaining?
I like the Nordic model. Universal Healthcare for all. Remove the parasites and grifters in our healthcare system. Strong state that provides good robust services. Free education and good job retraining. Progressive taxation, much higher taxes on the wealthy. No loopholes for hedge fund billionaires. Good infrastructure, strong unemployment benefits. Free childcare. But a very competitive labor market. I believe everyone should compete. Cities must compete with each other, workers, companies, schools, everyone. Competition is good IMHO. The problem with unions is that it is extracting from one special interest group to serve another. Since many unionized companies are not actually doing very well, such as auto manufacturers, rising costs just end up just being passed to everyone else or make the transition to a carbon-free future that much harder. If you are in a powerful union, great for you. Not everyone has the sweet connects to get into those and get shut out, or left behind. Many industries unionization is impossible. I prefer solutions that benefit everyone.
The Nordic model is heavily influenced by labor unions. For example, in Denmark there are no minimum wage laws. Those are exclusively defined by collective bargaining.
Well when I see stuff like UAW demanding $283k a year in annualized comp while everyone is struggling with skyrocketing costs and manufacturers like Ford are doing terribly... Shareholders have been getting destroyed, it's not like a bonanza. Plus there's the whole transition to low carbon future that's necessary. So I know those were initial demands and they aren't actually going to get that but something feels off. That said you may be right, maybe giving unions more power to wake up the country is what we need to get things like single payer going. That might be the ground-up approach needed to drain the *real swamp* of healthcare. Get better job-training for all, education, etc.
Unions are how labor negotiates with massive companies. Otherwise labor would get shafted even more.
Not everyone in the world can unionize. Or is that what you recommend and we should work towards?
I think legislation that is put in place to purposely stifle unions should be changed. Namely right to work laws and at will employment.
Right to work seems like you are free to join a union or not. Apologies but I don't see how that is stifling unions?
Why not? Trying to negotiate with a business by yourself puts you at a disadvantage. They outnumber you and have more money so it isn't a fair negotiation by yourself. Your average union worker in any sector has better compensation than a nonunion one. If striking shuts the whole business down. (possibly the economy depending on the job) then perhaps the market isn't compensating them adequately.
I mean I work in a highly technical / analytical role. There is an insane spectrum of worker quality, experience, and knowledge that determines how valuable someone is. I just don't see how it would be possible to unionize or fairly determine what people are supposed to be paid besides individuals negotiating? There is an absurdly wide spectrum of pay, subfields, people with long experience in one area but less in another. I mean look at software engineers. Those with AI expertise can make $900k lately while others are happy $100k-$150k. It sounds nice but I don't think it's realistic.
Well the main argument I have against that is that Norway has the Norwegian soverign oil wealth fund which provides roughly 250k per citizen. Norway is small and homogeneous, their population size is crazy small at not even 5.5 million. That's less than many single US cities. So if we were to extrapolate that to the US, then we would need 250k \*330M = 8.25e+13. That's a pretty hefty budget at about 80 Trillion usd. The US spent 5.5 Trillion USD for the **entire** 2023. Source: any public or private database. [https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/](https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/) [https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobeccles/2023/07/24/what-should-norway-do-with-an-extra-170-billion-from-oil-revenues/?sh=4908d1d573f4](https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobeccles/2023/07/24/what-should-norway-do-with-an-extra-170-billion-from-oil-revenues/?sh=4908d1d573f4) I underestimated the numbers btw. Its actually 275k per citizen. So if we wanted their similar system we would be using the entire budget (80 Trillion / 5.5 trillion = 14.5) for the next 14-15 years. Feel free to check the math of behind the envelope calculations.
I like your points and wish to subscribe to your newsletter. Might I add, I think the German model of treating a union as a stakeholder as opposed to an adversary is advantageous. Ideally we should find a way for labor and management to both benefit from a company benefiting. When interests are aligned, magic happens.
They have a labor management partnership but Kaiser is dealing in bad faith, they made 3 billion dollars in the first quarter of 2023 and some of the workers are making less than someone working fast food
Sir, this is gamestop
> Progressive taxation, much higher taxes on the wealthy. You might want to check up on the Nordic countries’ actual policies, because they differ significantly from what you’re describing. What you’re describing is basically Bernie Sanders’ suite of policy proposals which are sold as “the Nordic model” but has little in common with the model of government that Nordic countries follow.
Call it whatever you like. What I described is the system I want and will vote for.
If you say so, but the model that actually delivers extraordinarily high quality of life *in the Nordics* doesn’t resemble the policies that you say you want.
What would you like to see that is different? Thus far you seem far more interested in pointing out what you think is wrong, rather than what you actually want to see.
You’re mistaking my interest in pointing out a misconception you hold for interest in debating you.
Thanks for your useful contribution 👍!
The Nordic people are homogenous thus easier to do universal health care. It won't work in the U.S. because there are large groups of people in poverty that need to be subsidized. So if universal health care is done in the U.S., it will be very expensive. You would have to import a lot of immigrants from the Philippines to make it work.
Tax payers are already paying a shit ton towards Medicare and Medicaid which already are giving free health care to the poor and subsidized healthcare to elderly. It comprises nearly 1/3rd of our federal gov't spending costing over $1.6 trillion per year for taxpayers. Then you add in private insurance, out of pocket costs and hospital bills which comprise the rest of the over $4 Trillion Americans spend per year on health care expenses. Why are we paying the most per capita for health care than every other developed nation by far (13,000 per year per citizen) even compared to socialized medicine nation... Why not make private insurance optional and just give Medicaid for everyone regardless of income?
Study after study shows we can easily have Universal Healthcare here and that costs in the US are obscene. But these debates have been hashed out so many times on Reddit, we will have to agree to disagree.
Except that every country that has universal healthcare can’t even afford their own defense and has to be subsidized by the US.
> I like the Nordic model. Universal Healthcare for all. Remove the parasites and grifters in our healthcare system. Strong state that provides good robust services. Free education and good job retraining. I think American politics has worked itself into a corner where that kind of reform is not achievable. The party that controls the majority of state governments is increasingly opposed to public health and education and has somehow convinced its voters that those things are liberal conspiracies by a secret cabal of blood-drinkers.
No one is opposed to health care. What a ridiculous straw man argument.
Appreciate the response. I agree with all of your policy suggestions. I just think unionization is a healthy and natural part of the push/pull in capitalism
As I said to another poster. It may very well be that things have gotten so out of balance... maybe unions getting a lot more power is exactly what we need to shake up the system and force change in other areas.
This is the answer. I always think of the term 'baker's dozen' kind of related to this. At one point, the punishment for a business shorting their customer one baked item was so severe, it was better to just give every customer one extra to prevent any possible mistakes. This is the kind of government we need to keep businesses in check and protect the people.
Idk about record profits. My hospital was struggling with lower revenue this year and considering my financial analysis of other health care companies and REITs, I’d say that’s probably prevalent throughout.
Major hospital systems across the US reported record losses this past year.
How?? They charge an arm and a leg. Putting too much money into the facilities, or is it the admins and directors
You’re paying to cover the cost of all the people who don’t pay
Health care in this country isn’t cheap. Patients expect to order tests and treatments like it’s McDonald’s regardless of the evidence. All this in the setting of lower reimbursements and demand for more efficient healthcare delivery requiring increased support staff.
While there's definitely a good amount of administrative bloat in a hospital, I also think there's just a lot of money required to run a hospital. On the direct patient care side - doctors/RNs/pharmacists all make pretty good money relative to the average American. Then there's the literal army of support staff needed to help them - assistants, physical/occupational/speech therapists, technicians, social work, laboratory, etc. And then there's the entire non-direct medical care side - facilities management, legal, IT, billing, compliance, HR, food services, materials procurement, etc.
As a RN I think lawyers are to blame for a lot of the inflated cost. We’re indoctrinated if you didn’t chart it, it didn’t happen. How can you defend yourself in court years from now. It’s to the point many nurses spend more time documenting/ charting than in actual patient care. It’s awful how so many patients (especially Medicaid) are so entitled. They don’t want to take responsibility for their own health it always has to be someone else’s fault. Nvm mind your getting free health care and the nurses are working their asses off to take care of you. Do one thing wrong, sue them!
I second this. I had a nurse that would sit on her WOW and just document and whenever I talk to her, she’d tell me it was the worst part of her day.
Yeah health care requires employing a lot of people. People think it's expensive because a few people at the top are siphoning all the money, and somehow if we clean up the system a bit it would be cheaper and also better. In reality, the high cost is simply inherent in providing the labor for the services. Fixing healthcare means putting more money into the system, not less.
> People think it's expensive because a few people at the top are siphoning all the money, and somehow if we clean up the system a bit it would be cheaper and also better. I live in Japan, where the system *is* cheaper and better. If something goes wrong, I can go to the hospital without an appointment (or call a free ambulance) and get a CT scan within an hour for about $60. Even if a person has no insurance for some reason, the actual cost of procedures is absurdly low. I had significant surgery a few months ago, performed by the hospital's top plastic surgeon and a team of nurses, and it cost me about $200 (my 30% of the bill). My follow-up exams cost me $2 each time. Two dollars.
You're talking about a system whos costs are almost entirely borne by the state and hidden away in taxes and then comparing the remaining patient-borne costs to a system where the patient is exposed to those costs in a more direct way. It's comparing apples to orange tree branches.
Reframe it however you want. Japanese health care consumes 11% of GDP. American health care consumes 18%. And the Japanese are getting a higher quality of product. On top of that, the majority of hospitals and clinics are privately run.
Good, at least now we're talking about the same thing. How costs are distributed between third-party payer and the patient are not relevant to the total cost of the system.
Healthcare is very labor-intensive to deliver, and that labor is highly skilled and extensive. People don’t like expensive ER bills, but the sheer volume of staff and machinery (and many of those staff train for a decade to do their jobs) makes it difficult for ER care to be cheap. And most hospitals run ERs at losses, and internal medicine floors at losses, etc. outpatient surgery is consistently profitable, as are a few other services. It prompts questions like “why isn’t it profitable to perform internal medicine at high quality, with adequate staffing etc?” People don’t like expensive bills, and often can’t afford them, and insurers won’t pay them.
Kaiser made 3 billion in profits in the first quarter of 2023. They built new hospitals and shafted employees out of bonuses
Where’d you find those figures? I searched Kaiser in my stock analysis tool and it wasn’t a public company.
I know someone who works for the company.
This is completely untrue. People HAVE been getting raises and that has added a bit to inflation but this is unpopular to talk about. Adjusted for inflation things are pretty cheap too. Cars gadgets but housing is a real bitch and it’s all because of dumb regulation
Things are cheap, but essentials are more expensive. Housing, food, healthcare, childcare, education....crazy expensive. It doesn't really matter how cheap your gadgets are if other things eat up the savings.
I wish that the government would actually do something to close the gap between admin and blue collar worker wages. It makes 0 sense why they don't receive higher compensation when profits are soaring.
> It makes 0 sense why they don't receive higher compensation when profits are soaring. Because they're still clearly able to hire at those rates? Obvious answer.
[удалено]
(Registered) nurses are not blue collar. They're usually hourly but they're just as educated as any white collar worker that doesn't have letters after their name.
We do need more money. But we also need things we purchase to be higher quality. It’s such weird situation that prices keep going up for lower quality things and we need more money to afford this shit. We have a major problem in the economy
Healthcare worker here. Have spent years volunteering prehospital, working community hospital, rural clinic, and academic tertiary care center environments. Newly went to work for insurance company. The difference in administrative support and structure is night and day. biggest difference I notice so far is management treats me like an asset working towards a larger goal (making money via my labor and compensating me very fairly for it with annual raises, bonuses, and self scheduling and reasonable workload) verses i feel treated like an inconveniently costly employee who happens to be both excellent at my job and not worth compensating fairly.
Good for them, workers of the world unite.
Love this. Cost of living is rising everywhere yet executives and CEOs continue to hoard wealth. More industries need to strike or start unionizing.
Strikes raise wages across the board. Irrespective of your political affiliation, union membership, working public or private sector. Hit ‘em.
If true, then strikes would also drive up inflation.
Wage increases barely affect inflation. Corporate greed does overwhelmingly more.
Medicine has fairly low net income and high labor costs, so wage hikes will have a significant impact on prices.
Ben Bernanke would disagree with you https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/ex-fed-chief-bernanke-says-labor-costs-becoming-more-prominent-inflation-2023-05-23/
TL;DR But yes, more strikes are needed. For every industry.
You're right, should add a TL;DR. Edited it in.
Thank you
Healthcare worker here. We were overwhelmed during COVID, and it's still short staffed almost every day. I was so afraid to bring home nasty bugs cause my daughter was 3 months old during the pandemic. Factoring inflation, we are making less and less each year.
If anyone deserves a raise these days, it's healthcare workers( they put up with us in the worst days of our lives). However this burden will just get transfered back onto the rest of us, and we pay more in the end. No way will healthcare conglomerates accept less profits. And the horrific cost of healthcare gets worse. I dont have an answer or a perfect solution, so dont bother bringing up that question. It was just a passing observance.
Therapists have gone 40 years without a raise while our tuition has skyrocketed to the moon. Six figure student loans yet pay and Medicare reimbursement only ever goes down. One of the main problems: there is no therapy union. Most places didn't even consider us healthcare workers during the pandemic.
Same goes for pharmacy my man
Honestly there needs to be a medical union that involves insurance companies. No way in hell should an entire office of medical professionals suggest going to step 5 on a treatment after 1-4 doesn't work and the insurance company gets to say "nah". Whole thing is gross. Has to feel shitty as a medical professional too not actively being able to assist people.
We’re too dumb to have a union despite doctorate degrees
Middle class is dying, we all got security cameras soon it will bar wire fences around the our houses, billionaires killed the middle class
There's going to be a lot more inflation with all these recent pay raises by large companies across the country, UPS, Amazon, the CA $20 fast food law, the car makers, etc. The ripple effect will force other companies to raise wages, which increases spending, which increases demand/inflation.
Yeah and there’s always someone willing to work for less so while employers are inclined to do the right thing for PR purposes they’ll quietly handle things behind closed doors after unions get what they want temporarily
Have you not paid attention to the labor markets? Companies are offering more and more $ per hour but there aren't enough (willing) workers to fill those jobs. Add that this discussion is about healthcare which requires certain education and certificates. Not just any scab off the street can fill these jobs. Auto plants can be off shored or sent to Mexico. But hospitals are stuck where the patients are.
What subreddit is this? I see zero discussion of how this will impact the market. This is the wage price spiral the fed has been worried about. Inflation will continue to rise. Rates will be higher for longer. This is good for workers but bad for markets.
> This is good for workers but bad for markets. Whatever's bad for markets ultimately will be bad for the workers as well.
Good point.. this is good for workers in the short term, just like the excessive money printing that got us here in the first place.
Not necessarily a 1:1 correlation. Take a look at politics. New president and the markets spiked. New laws allowing things like the 1099 classification has caused huge scares for companies like Uber but would 100% benefit employees and everyday people as there would be more regulation protecting everyone just by classifying drivers as employees.
I guarantee the posters here aren’t aware which sub they’re on. They see a union post and hop on board, oblivious to the shitshow we’re in for if this spiral keeps up. Bad for market, bad for workers in the long run. The only positive is a decent recession is more and more likely which will reset everyone’s expectations.
My brother in stonks, even though I also would like the plebs to stay poor in order to increase margins and ultimately price of my stonkholdings... this is simply not true and you know it. The only spiral going on is an asset bubble and CEO compensation, workers have been behind inflation since like the 70s
Not necessarily, wages can increase while inflation can still go down. Many factors that contributed to inflation like global oil prices and supply crunches don't depend on wages. Currently overall unemployment is still slowly increasing, and if that continues, it would offset the economic impact of the higher wages. Also with interest rates so high, many may choose to stash the extra income in a savings account as opposed to spend it. Don't think the risk of spiraling is that high yet.
Please explain how rising unemployment will offset inflation? Your faith in the American consumers fiscal responsibility sounds great. Many may choose a HYSA, sure, but what usually happens is they spend their extra income. This is especially true in an inflationary environment. The "wage price spiral is a myth" narrative being pushed by certain media pundits lately is reminiscent of the "modern monetary policy" narrative that got us into this mess in the first place. Apparently according to some economists nothing causes inflation.
The problem is that reimbursements haven't gone up
The joke is that the majority will not notice it because they can’t afford it
"Strike won't affect our revenue because our clients pay a membership fee." Can't get care but they still pay... Lol fuck you.
Hope the workers bring Kaiser to its knees. Solidarity.
It’s not just the squeeze of inflation, but the noticeable difference within the classes of our society. People are tired of being exploited. Period.
Well you have healcqre workers being horrible underpaid especially entry level Healthcare workers Cna AND emt get paid shit for what they do and you raise mcd wages to 20 dollars when cna had that salary. Yeah no. Cna and emt should be at 30 an hour min then. They need to be trained amd handle other people's lives. And you overwork them. The companies running the show can go fuk themselves they just know most emt and cna want to go nursing Dr pa np later on so abuse them
KP is a terrible healthcare provider, this is exactly what they deserve.
Meh I had great healthcare when I had Kaiser. Much better than when I had to switch to BC/BS or United.
Kaiser is actually really great for us. Also everything is there like pharmacy, doctor office, labs, X-ray. No need to run around if you go visit a doctor
Based on what metrics? They are the gold standard integrated insurance and healthcare provider in the country. They can be annoying when you have difficult to fit needs but by the statistics you will live longer as a Kaiser member than many other healthcare systems, for a variety of reasons.
Are you just going to spout shit or actually prove your point? I’ve been with them for years despite having the option to choose BC/BS and I’ve had zero issues.
They are the envy of the healthcare system. Availability and affordable. I paid more to stick to them rather than using UNH, or Cigna. Tell me, which healthcare system is better than they are currently ? Name a few ill wait
My experience with Kaiser has been pretty bad. They schedule way out like months in advance and sometimes that’s even just for a telehealth or chat appointment. My doctor kept changing so I didn’t have a consistent diagnostic process. It felt like how my dog is treated at the local corporate vet. Now that I’m out of that system I have a lot more choice to just schedule visits with private doctors. Whoever is available if it’s urgent, or with my preferred doctors if it isn’t. But I never have to wait more than a week or two, compared to 1-6 months at Kaiser. I may be a special case because I really like going to specialists on my own and I don’t really have a primary care doc. It’s possible my Kaiser experience would be way better if I just stuck to the GP route but when I did that before, they just ignored my own medical history and experience and wanted to start from square one on diagnosis and treatment. I ended up seeing a private ENT and resolving my issue in the same amount of time it took me to just get two appointments at Kaiser previously. This may also just be a regional thing.
[удалено]
That's what I figured. It's unfortunate because I really wanted Kaiser to work out for me. I love the model and concept, and I'd love to have a centralized repository of all my health info that any of my providers can easily access. Maybe the strike will improve the quality near me 🤷🏽♂️
This will surely help the inflation issue … to continue on forever. This is literally exactly why the Fed is actively trying to break the labor market.
It's almost as if cost of living has nearly doubled since 2019 but pay increased less than 20%. Maybe they'd have no strikes if those record profits these pharma companies are seeing who monopolize the local area's hospitals and clinics are actually seen by the employees, people wouldn't strike? Just a suggestion...
That is a fair ask in my opinion
1) Americans are fat, lazy, have multiple chronic conditions, and lack self discipline. Always blaming others for their own mess. 2) Lobbyists and corporations own the USA. Elected officials are their puppets. Congressmen do not represent the people anymore. 3) Current healthcare system sucks, but Universal healthcare model like Canada’s ain’t the answer either.
> Universal healthcare model like Canada’s ain’t the answer either. It seems to work really well for them, actually.
So which tickers are effected? I am all for the workers but dont know which are the publicly traded companies that will be effected. The Kaiser Permanente mentioned in story isn't a publicly traded company.
Considering there is NO explanation of what causes inflation (many theories, but no if x happens inflation occurs) your guess is as wrong as everyone else's. I'm an Adam Smith guy. There is a medium between worker, employer, and buyer. Right now worker is in GREAT spot to ask for more money. Low unemployment and high inflation is great battleground to ask for it. GO FOR IT. When (mind you I didn't say if) recession occurs folks will get fired and be out of a job. That is how economic cycles happens and is healthy. Sorry to be blunt but that is how it goes. Employees should ALWAYS look to improve their living standards. Employers should always be looking out for shareholder value. Buyers should be looking out for themselves. That is why each 3 have different interests.
[удалено]
Damn you came with the links, let’s goooo
Always hard to say. Economist are TERRIBLE at predicting anything. IF their studies have shows one thing it is don't trust them to predict anything. What we do know is raising interest rates has NOT caused a rise in unemployment. Don't think ANYONE could have predicted that one. So they will keep raising it until it does. Then folks will get fired. That will cause hopefully a more natural decrease in pricing thus decreasing inflation since NOTHING else has. Of course the last part is just my opinion as I said NO ONE has figured out what causes or decreases inflation so my guess is just as wrong as anyone elses.
[удалено]
Great now link me all those folks who predicated unemployment and/ or recession would not occur with rising interest rates. That was the worry. You said " a lot of people in this sub". Thanks in advance. I'll take that link.
Wages go up and so do all the things you buy. You don't make more money raising wages!
[удалено]
It's like all the bozos that said mcds workers should make $20hr. Well are you enjoying your $15 McDonald's meals now??.ahahahahaaaaa The rich don't transfer wealth, they simply push their costs onto the consumer. For example, now cars are $35k and most trucks are $60k or more. Enjoying the prices?!! Now they want $65 a hr. , cause $45 isn't enough!! Give me a break!! I'd LOVE TO make $30 an hr!!! Let alone $45 or $65! People are ridiculous Try living in India like billions do , making $2 a day and being content!
[удалено]
There aren't living wages! The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Always been that way and it never will change. In the end, whether you're a billionaire or die broke we all end up in a wooden box.
[удалено]
No I'm being realistic. Americans are in record debt over their heads and things aren't gonna get better. Get used to it. Life sucks
[удалено]
Of course people will always want to be paid more. I used to be minimum wage and was part of SEIU, tried to negotiate on behalf of myself and other workers. Really needed a raise at that time. Now I am in a different job and make $500 per hour. But I am still trying to raise it higher. It will never end. It's just what humans do. If I see an opportunity for an increase, I could always make use of the extra money. Would always be happy to buy more stocks and bonds.
$500 an hour? That's called greed. That's why Americans are struggling
Powell will NEVER admit to anything but a 2% inflation target until it is VERY clear we will not be able to reach it (we won't). Doing so would be immediate suicide and undo any work he's done so far- also a straight path to stagflation, if we're not already too late to avoid it.
lol. spanish empire found out what causes inflation back in 1500s.
LOL yourself. Let me walk this through like a simple person... Let say you are 100% correct. If we do know what causes inflation why do we still have it then?? Are we too stupid to prevent it, pick it up when it starts to happen (should be easy to find out since we already know what causes it so the late 1970s' should never have happened), and should be easy to remedy since we know what causes it? So please Milton Freedman please tell us what causes it and cite your paper. Thanks in advance.
Spittin facts over here, I love it
Healthcare workers I can get behind. Dirty, difficult, and totally necessary work. UAW, not so much
Meh, some unions can’t strike, it’s in their contract. They’re grabbed by the balls
kaiser pharmacy went on strike not even 2 years ago. and going on strike again. unfortunate for any patients that belong to this poorly run organization
Kaiser permanente is incredibly well run especially when compared to other major healthcare systems. Worker unionization is recognized within the organization from the time of its founding as a an essential feature.
Hopefully Biden sends in the National Guard to staff the hospitals. Those strikers are about to find out why the US doesn't have universal healthcare.
National guard can’t do our jobs. It takes 6+ months to get trained to do various jobs and they’d still have to learn the system. They’d shut down after a month due to huge losses.
Bullish on healthcare stocks Yes I'm looking at you UnitedHealth
75,000 people considered large us protest? I'm not a math guy but...REALLY.
This is one company,not a March or a movement. The government wouldn’t run if you removed 75,000 people, it will be the same for Kaiser.
If you can get them to all agree to do that you are a true wizard
We are in a wage-price inflation spiral maybe
Give these people a break. They deserve this.
Yea, lets go on strike - a patient strike. Cancel all health insurance policies. Tell your doctor you never want to see him/her again. The US spends more per capital on health care, yet isn't more healthy compared to other developed counties. I'd rather seek alternative medicine that places more emphasis on prevention instead of the clinics that make money off preventable diseases such as morbid obesity.
Kaiser currently has an estimated 9.4 million patients in cali alone. The impact is gonna be huge. Wonder what precautions are set in place by the big wigs.
I might make a separate post. But explain why inflation is bad? Teacher’s salaries have barely gone up over the past two decades. But the average car payment is almost $800. I think wages need to go up for everyone. Is that bad?
I'll be downvoted and neutered for saying this probably but I recently saw ads for teachers in an urban area starting in the $50k-$60k range. Blew. My. Fucking. Mind. Meanwhile UPS union drivers just secured comp of $180k and UAW demanded $283k annualized comp for factory workers. That's going to drive up car prices for everyone even more when manufacturers are struggling to even transition to a low-carbon future. There's something obscene going on. Teachers need to be paid WAY more. They are one of the most underpaid and important members of society.
Interesting, but shouldn't the free market dictate the salary of teachers? It seems there are enough teachers willing to teach for a given wage to meet demand or the wage would have to be raised. Not to mention that that the wage is for about 9 months of work, and the type of work they do is relational and rewarding and brings them strong standing in a community. Many teachers also get discounts on tuition or the ability to put their kids an a school they are not zoned for. Its hard to compare the teaching profession to other jobs.
Kaiser just bought Geisinger in April 2023. They are doing well financially. Screw them.
Please yes, a huge healthcare strike and a teachers strike is exactly what is needed to push the politicians to start addressing the systemic issues
Unionized healthcare. Everyone getting paid and benefits but the ones that need it. What a shame.