Comments on: Top of the morning http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2010/01/29/top-of-the-morning-266/ The Progressive Pulse is a blog about the issues, debates, and people that affect North Carolina public policy. As with the organization that sponsors it, NC Policy Watch, its ultimate objective is to improve the quality of life in the state, in this case by promoting the development of an informed, energetic and progressive online community. The Progressive Pulse welcomes the contributions of interested people of all points of view provided they are of a reasonable length, have some relevance to issues of North Carolina public policy and abide by the common rules of online etiquette (i.e., please avoid inappropriate language and show a measure of respect for others --even the John Locke Foundation). To post a comment, simply click the comment line then provide your name and email. Your email address will not be collected or shared. If you would like to be contributing writer, please send your post to info@ncpolicywatch.com with 'blog' in the subject line. If the post meets with our criteria (has a progressive perspective and is relative to our state), we will publish it. Mon, 06 Sep 2010 21:57:02 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: gregflynn http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2010/01/29/top-of-the-morning-266/comment-page-1/#comment-58350 gregflynn Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:10:43 +0000 http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/?p=11244#comment-58350 Sorry, health care comment in wrong thread Sorry, health care comment in wrong thread

]]> By: gregflynn http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2010/01/29/top-of-the-morning-266/comment-page-1/#comment-58349 gregflynn Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:09:06 +0000 http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/?p=11244#comment-58349 The price of private health insurance is not directly related to the cost of care. Profits, recission, non-care spending, caps, denial protocols, and, in particular, profits or losses from insurance company investments and derivatives all figure into the price. In a good economy premiums don't necessarily cover the cost. In a bad economy premiums can rise to cover much more than the cost of care including investment losses. The price of private health insurance is not directly related to the cost of care. Profits, recission, non-care spending, caps, denial protocols, and, in particular, profits or losses from insurance company investments and derivatives all figure into the price. In a good economy premiums don’t necessarily cover the cost. In a bad economy premiums can rise to cover much more than the cost of care including investment losses.

]]> By: gregflynn http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2010/01/29/top-of-the-morning-266/comment-page-1/#comment-58342 gregflynn Fri, 29 Jan 2010 16:20:17 +0000 http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/?p=11244#comment-58342 You're pointing at Democrats with Bush's veto pen. There have been 2 recessions since 2000 separated by an anomylous growth spurt 2005-2007 caused by the housing bubble. Blaming Congressional Democrats for the crash is like blaming your boss for a Monday morning hangover. You’re pointing at Democrats with Bush’s veto pen. There have been 2 recessions since 2000 separated by an anomylous growth spurt 2005-2007 caused by the housing bubble. Blaming Congressional Democrats for the crash is like blaming your boss for a Monday morning hangover.

]]> By: pino http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2010/01/29/top-of-the-morning-266/comment-page-1/#comment-58338 pino Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:46:12 +0000 http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/?p=11244#comment-58338 <i>The study does not include 2009 when poverty and unemployment rose significantly.</i> Nor does the study include the last 40 years or so: In 1959 18% of the white, 55% of the black and 23% (though this is 1972 number) were living in poverty for a national average of 22% In 1999 those % changed to 10%, 24%, 23% and 12% total respectively. Further, while being poor in America relative to other American's is one method of measuring, it is also useful to see what being poor in America is like compared to the rest of the world. The average living space per person for someone listed as poor? 721 sq feet. The average living space for all of Europe, independent of poverty status? 396 sq feet. Further, what does being poor in America give you? Some examples, in 2004: 45.9% owned their home 72.8 had a car 97.3 had a color TV 55.3 had TWO color TVs 62.6 had cable or satellite The study does not include 2009 when poverty and unemployment rose significantly.

Nor does the study include the last 40 years or so:

In 1959 18% of the white, 55% of the black and 23% (though this is 1972 number) were living in poverty for a national average of 22%

In 1999 those % changed to 10%, 24%, 23% and 12% total respectively.

Further, while being poor in America relative to other American’s is one method of measuring, it is also useful to see what being poor in America is like compared to the rest of the world.

The average living space per person for someone listed as poor? 721 sq feet. The average living space for all of Europe, independent of poverty status? 396 sq feet.

Further, what does being poor in America give you?

Some examples, in 2004:

45.9% owned their home
72.8 had a car
97.3 had a color TV
55.3 had TWO color TVs
62.6 had cable or satellite

]]> By: IBXer http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2010/01/29/top-of-the-morning-266/comment-page-1/#comment-58328 IBXer Fri, 29 Jan 2010 14:56:49 +0000 http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/?p=11244#comment-58328 All this shows is that poverty began to rise rapidly in 2007, they year after the Dems took control of both Chambers of Congress. All this shows is that poverty began to rise rapidly in 2007, they year after the Dems took control of both Chambers of Congress.

]]>