Author: Larry Littlefield

With an assist from the staff of the Medicaid Statistical Information System (MSIS), I’ve crunched down Medicaid beneficiary and spending data for FY 2007. The assist was required because the Datamart program only works with Internet Explorer, and my teenagers convinced me to shift over to Apple when my old computer wore out. Previously, I had found that the Regional Economic Information System disks from the Bureau of Economic Analysis could only be used on Windows machines, not I-Macs. I guess the federal government doesn’t do Apple, although I haven’t had a problem with the Census Bureau yet. Those who have read my past posts on this subject might as well just download the attached spreadsheets for the latest year, because not much changes. But for those who are interested in my analysis, details on beneficiaries, spending, spending per beneficiary and related information follows.

It appears that Generation Greed is responding to the upcoming elections the way it always does — by selling out the future of the country and younger generations. The Obama Administration came in promising investment in America's future, funded by borrowing, through the Build America Bond Act. But older generations don't want to build America, they want to securitize it as a way of getting more for less right now. And they are becoming more and more desperate as the diminished future ensured by 30 years of their past decisions continues to arrive.

So now, according to the Wall Street Journal, the Obama Administration proposes that the Build America Bond act be made permanent, with an ongoing federal subsidy (funded by the federal debt) for state and local bonds (more debt) issued not just for capital improvements (which might provide some benefit in the future when younger generations are forced to pay back the debt) but also to pay for more services and lower taxes right now. This might be the one Obama proposal that doesn’t get filibustered, as it is one that consistent with Republican principles. Not theoretical principles from the far off Republican past, actual ones from the past 30 years.

In his State of the Union address, President Obama asked if anyone had a better idea to hold down the cost of health care, cover the uninsured, and reduce the deficit. I laid out the problems, proposals, problems with the proposals, my solution, and how to pay for it back when in the attached document, and my views haven’t changed. Just my optimism.

The travails of the news media, with declining paid subscriptions and advertising revenues, are well known to all. I wrote a prior post with my suggestion as to how to fund local news coverage. Now, however, the U.S. Supreme Court has given me a new idea. A new type of newspaper could be created that would consist entirely of "news" that people had paid to put in it.

No longer would corporations and unions have to fund "think tanks" to issue "reports" that PR flacks then pushed reporters to write articles on as "news." The reporters would be eliminated, cutting costs. No longer would publishers have to agonize over whether to, for example, publish articles pointing out that there is a housing bubble or private motor vehicles kill a lot of people and are bad for he environment — risking their real estate and auto ads. No longer would the free flow of information be impaired, and the Bill of Rights confounded, by artificial restrictions. The "news" presented would be put up to the highest bidder.

The MTA document on service reductions includes the ridership and average cost per ride for every NYC bus route. Even when I was inside NYC Transit, I never saw a tabulation of costs, although ridership was tabulated.

Cost data is provided for LI Bus and MTA Bus Company lines as well, in other reports. And as for rail, it isn’t provided but could be if the MTA would use Metrocard data how much times trains spend on each part of the line to do an estimate as well. Perhaps the cost of maintaining the express tracks could be assigned to outer lines. And for real sophistication, distinguish marginal from average costs, with the marginal cost of additional rush hour riders on the Lexington Avenue line equal to — the cost of the Second Avenue Subway. Finally, look at the dedicated MTA taxes paid by those in different areas, relative to the level of subsidy, not including the portion that is sucked away by the past (debts, unfunded past pensions, etc). The more the better.

And as one who cares about Jack’s future, I’m sick of it.

Like Albany, our health care financing system is not “dysfunctional,” but rather functions very well for those with power and privilege.

Today’s senior citizens get government-funded health care without limit, funded in part by a tax that workers pay and the retired do not, and in part by borrowing on such a scale that there is no chance that (absent some restraint) Medicare will be there for younger generations when they need it.

Public employees also get the same deal – virtually unlimited health care paid for by less well off taxpayers who increasingly do not have health insurance themselves, particularly if they are in younger generations.