All Things in Moderation

Morning Report 7/3/12

14 Responses

1. 

   Michigoose, on July 3, 2012 at 8:22 am said:

   You, too, Brent, and have fun in the new home. I, for one will be trying to figure out if (1) I can get the Tour de France to influence the markets, and (2) whether or not I can hack into the computers and steal all the money during the World Cup. 🙂

   Cheers!

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. 

   Mike, on July 3, 2012 at 11:07 am said:

   Brent:

   The debt-to-income ratio for Norwegians is almost impossibly high. That’s all due to the housing market? I found Figure 4 from the FRBSF link to be interesting too — 70% of Norwegians think the housing bubble will continue. Irrational exuberance, anyone?

   LikeLike

   Reply
3. 

   Brent Nyitray, on July 3, 2012 at 11:11 am said:

   Mike, it has to be due to the housing market… people taking on huge mortgages.

   The Norwegian economy is heavily geared towards oil and banking. If oil prices drop as people switch to nat gas, watch out in Oslo. Going to be an ugly crash.

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. 

   Mike, on July 3, 2012 at 11:51 am said:

   Brent:

   Well, I see that Brent crude has made it back over $100/bbl for now. Perhaps the instability in the Middle East with Iran is good for Norway in the short term.

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. 

   Michigoose, on July 3, 2012 at 3:49 pm said:

   Mike:

   Just out of curiosity, how is Gov Scott’s announcement that he’s not going to go along with the Medicaid expansion playing with the hometown crowd? Out here in ultra-Red Utah Gov WalkerHerbert is, AFAIK, planning on going along with the expansion just like he’s been getting the exchange set up over the last couple of years.

   What about OK, okie? Is your governor talking about making waves?

   EDIT: went back in time a few years to our only female Governor, who should have been re-elected

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • 

     okiegirl, on July 3, 2012 at 4:02 pm said:

     As far as I know (and I checked just yesterday), our gov has not said specifically one way or the other. She did hold a press conference expressing her disappointment in the ruling and urging voters to turn out in November to elect a new President who will repeal ACA. The entire clip I saw was nothing but GOTV. But recall that she previously turned down $50+ million in federal funds for the exchanges, so I will be pretty surprised if she starts doing anything before November. Fallin is as dumb as a stump in a lot of ways, but she knows how to get elected, so we’ll see. As an aside, there is a humorous local blog that loves to gig her and her family. See http://www.thelostogle.com/2011/06/21/mary-fallins-daughter-takes-interesting-engagement-pictures/

     LikeLike

     Reply
6. 

   Mike, on July 3, 2012 at 4:50 pm said:

   Michi:

   I think Gov. Scott is playing to his Tea Party base. He has consistently refused ACA money and has not done anything to set up exchanges. His refusal to go along with the Medicaid expansion is wholly consistent with his previous stances on not accepting federal money for other things, like high-speed rail.

   Scott’s overall approval rating is in the 30s, but in the 60s with the GOP base. I don’t think Scott is looking to get independent or D votes for the next election.

   LikeLike

   Reply
7. 

   Troll McWingnut or George, whichever, on July 3, 2012 at 6:18 pm said:

   I heard that if a state refuses to set up exchanges, the Feds step in and do it, and if the Feds do it, no subsidies will be provided because in drafting Obamacare they forgot to put it in. I guess they really had to pass the bill to find out what’s in the bill.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • 

     okiegirl, on July 3, 2012 at 6:43 pm said:

     Troll, as I understand it, you are correct about the Feds stepping in to set up the exchanges if the states do not do so by a certain deadline. The subsidy OK turned down was for the purpose of setting them up, but we have yet to do anything in that regard. This is the first I’ve heard that they “forgot” to provide for subsidies if the Feds do it, so you’ll have to convince me. Any credible links? I don’t see why a state would be subsidized for not doing what the subsidy is for, so that just does not make sense to me.

     LikeLike

     Reply
8. 

   Troll McWingnut or George, whichever, on July 3, 2012 at 6:49 pm said:

   Okie, here’s a link from todays NY Post.

   http://m.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/obamacare_now_bigger_mess_ZQXHK0gILBo5NZ9NpCIPnN

   Here’s the relevant paragraph:

   “Anyway, federal subsidies are available only through exchanges that the states set up. The feds can’t offer subsidies through a federally run exchange.”

   LikeLike

   Reply
9. 

   lmsinca, on July 3, 2012 at 7:02 pm said:

   Okie, Here’s an interesting piece from David Dayen regarding what McWing’s talking about. It’s a little discouraging though for a Holiday.

   So why isn’t Jindal reluctantly complying rather than hand a small measure of sovereignty over to the federal government? Because as the result of a drafting oversight, Congress neglected to include automatic appropriations for federally facilitated exchanges (FFEs). That means there’s money on hand to help states that want to set up the exchanges themselves, but the government’s options vis-a-vis states that can’t or won’t act on their own are more limited […]

   The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) can reallocate money appropriated to HHS’ generic operations account internally, to put more toward establishing FFEs. But in anticipation of the need for greater funding, HHS included a request for $1 billion for program operations in its fiscal year 2013 budget, according to administration and Senate officials. The Senate Appropriations Committee, controlled by Democrats, has recommended just over half a billion for this account. But House Republicans could use their leverage to block providing HHS with any funds they think the administration might need to implement the ACA.

   LikeLike

   Reply
10. 

    okiegirl, on July 3, 2012 at 7:43 pm said:

    Thanks to both you, I missed that. Sheesh.

    LikeLike

    Reply
11. 

    lmsinca, on July 3, 2012 at 7:45 pm said:

    Here’s an interesting factoid I learned last year. Some of you may know that my husband and I have our health insurance via small group insurance for small businesses. The only way we can keep it is if I continue to be an employee until 65 and my husband keeps working (business owner) until 67. In other words we can’t retire until I’m at least 65 as I wouldn’t be able to get health insurance. I learned last year that the only avenue for him to get supplemental insurance for medicare next year in April, when he turns 65, is through our existing provider, otherwise I will lose my insurance……lol. His supplemental costs twice as much this way than normally would, so even though we’ll save a little because he’ll be on medicare, instead of $1600 a month for the two of us it will still be about $1400, we’ll still be stuck with the big bill.

    If the exchanges actually open in 2014, I’ll be able to get my insurance there and he’ll be able to retire a year earlier.

    LikeLike

    Reply
12. 

    Michigoose, on July 3, 2012 at 7:59 pm said:

    Thanks for the info, guys! (and I mean that in the good Midwestern non-gendered way that “y’all” is used in the South).

    LikeLike

    Reply