j_b

"Just make sure you define what a trucker is and the data should be available in triplicate before anyone can even consider how deregulation was meant to drive labor costs to the bottom, which couldn't possibly have any relation to private debt levels"

But isn't the alternative to government the unfettered free market, i.e. the insurance industry? I'm not sure you can have it both ways. "Get your freakin' government hands off my Medicare"

The legacy of deregulation in trucking: "Sweatshops on Wheels" or "letting truckers set their own prices" according to JayB U.S. News and World Report: "Conditions are so poor and the pay system so unfair that long-haul companies compete with the fast-food industry for workers. Most long-haul carriers experience 100% annual driver turnover." The Washington Post: "The first credible cry in the wilderness describing the pitiful state to which the American trucking industry has fallen. The cabs of 18-wheelers have become the sweatshops of the new millennium, with some truckers toiling up to 95 hours per week for what amounts to barely more than the minimum wage. [This book] is eye-opening in its appraisal of what the trucking industry has become."- Atlanta Journal-Constitution: "The first credible cry in the wilderness describing the pitiful state to which the American trucking industry has fallen. Long hours, low wages, and unsafe workplaces characterized sweatshops a hundred years ago. These same conditions plague American trucking today". Sweatshops on Wheels: Winners and Losers in Trucking Deregulation exposes the dark side of government deregulation in America's interstate trucking industry. In the years since deregulation in 1980, median earnings have dropped 30% and most long-haul truckers earn less than half of pre-regulation wages. Work weeks average more than sixty hours. Today, America's long-haul truckers are working harder and earning less than at any time during the last four decades. Written by a former long-haul trucker who now teaches industrial relations at Wayne State University, Sweatshops on Wheels raises crucial questions about the legacy of trucking deregulation in America and casts provocative new light on the issue of government deregulation in general. How could deregulation have possibly contributed to making America's workforce more vulnerable?

I just gave you a 57 minute lecture to listen to that did exactly that. Pull your head out of your ass, that'll help. classic "if I don't acknowledge the data, it goes away, and I can claim that we already discussed it" moment

Thanks to over 30 years of deregulation, 1/3 of the labor force has been pushed into part-time, temporary, contract jobs that pay a small fraction of full time employment and provide essentially no benefits. But there is no crisis of the real economy pre-dating the financial collapse according to status quo apologists, so having to pay for one's overpriced health care and worthless pension plan while earning a fraction of what one use to earn couldn't have contributed to it.

Specific examples? Deregulation is directly responsible for lack of health care insurance, which in turn is the leading cause of bankruptcy: State Report Demonstrates Cost of Deregulation of Health Insurance Premiums Deregulation of health insurance premiums has resulted in excessive rate increases that require many New Yorkers to pay more for health insurance than they should, and even force some to drop coverage altogether, according to a report issued today by the New York State Insurance Department. Governor David A. Paterson has submitted a bill to reinstate the Insurance Department’s authority to review health insurance premiums before insurers raise rates to ensure that the increases are not excessive. - Health Insurers Can Increase Premiums With Virtually No Oversight. The Insurance Department is not allowed, by law, to review insurers’ rate calculations or underlying actuarial assumptions, much less approve or disapprove a premium increase before it goes into effect. - Health Insurers Have Failed to Self-Police. File and use does contain a self-policing mechanism that requires insurers to refund excessive premiums to policyholders, but not until almost two years after the premium rate goes into effect. However, the mechanism does not protect against all abuses and it has clearly not worked. Under prior approval (1990-1995), the Insurance Department reduced 24% of premium rates submitted by health plans after concluding the rate was excessive. Under file and use (1996-2007), when it was up to the health plans to report their own overcharges, health plans self-reported excessive rates only 3% of the time. Between 2000 and 2007, health plans refunded approximately $48 million in overcharged premiums without Insurance Department intervention. Insurance Department investigations of some filings found that during this same period some health plans overcharged policyholders an additional $105 million - more than twice what the plans “self-policed” under file and use. This number may be understated because of the loopholes discussed below that may hide some excessive rates. - File and Use Hinders Insurance Department Enforcement. File and use contains loopholes that allow health plans to revise underlying assumptions after the rates go into effect to avoid paying refunds. For example, at the end of a year, health plans can increase their estimate of claims they will have to pay but have not yet received, which are known as the reserves for “incurred but not received,” or IBNR, claims. - Uninsured. Under file and use, an unjustified rate increase can result in an unjustified loss of health insurance coverage. File and use gives health plans until September 30 after the applicable year to pay refunds -- up to 21 months after rate increases go into effect. No relief is available to consumers or businesses that had to cancel their coverage because they could not afford the inflated rate increase in the first place. As such, file and use is a classic case of “justice delayed is justice denied.” - File and Use Undermines Efforts to Help the Most Vulnerable. The state spent about $826 million from 2000 to 2008 in subsidies to make health insurance more affordable for working low-income New Yorkers and individuals with health conditions that make insurance very expensive. File and use, deregulated and subject to abuse, directly contravenes the State’s efforts to enhance affordability in these markets and protect consumers. While New York is trying to increase health coverage, file and use works to decrease it. - Insurers’ Profits Have Increased While Health Insurance Has Become Less Affordable for Small Businesses and Individuals. Under deregulation, health insurer profits have been high. For example, in 1996, health insurers paid less than two percent of premiums as dividends to their parent companies. In 2007, they paid more than eight percent of premiums as dividends to their parent companies. Indeed, health plans have distributed more than $5.4 billion in dividends since full deregulation in 1999.

As if the race to the bottom labor cost and the flight/destruction of legacy jobs hadn't been enabled by widespread deregulation and consolidations into oligopolies.

more than 160 airline bankruptcies triggering the loss of 100,000's of middle class jobs and retirements packages since deregulation in 1978. Yet JayB still claims it had no effect on the economic security of employees and their need to take on debt to meet fixed expenses. It's pretty dishonest to claim that free-market fundamentalists like Alan Greenspan, Milton Friedman, etc .. haven't been in charge over the last 30+ years.

I just gave you a 57 minute lecture to listen to that did exactly that. Pull your head out of your ass, that'll help.

perhaps I should make sure you aren't in favor of eating babies for breakfast?

LOL are there 500,000 people (number of people on no-fly list) associated with bombs on airplane? just because their name is similar to that of some wacko or because they are anti-war activists? You are a dangerous liberticidal phony who always gargles about 'freedom' Nation states have a right to control their borders. Part of that whole Westphalian thing you despise so much. Maybe we should just get rid of the metal detectors too? Nation states don't have any right to restrict the travels (or it's mode) of law abiding citizens. These are the kind of moments when all your rhetoric about freedom and constitution is shown to be a hollow veneer that conveniently hides your authoritarian outlook.

Strawman for I didn't say that air travel security measures were unnecessary, but how is targeting democratic opponents of government policies increasing our security? How is making a huge no fly list of ~500,000 names, instead of targeting terrorists, increasing our security?

LOL are there 500,000 people (number of people on no-fly list) associated with bombs on airplane? just because their name is similar to that of some wacko or because they are anti-war activists? You are a dangerous liberticidal phony who always gargles about 'freedom'

what a surprise: another retard regurgitating the usual lies about progressives wanting to increase taxes on the middle and lower classes.

That's rich coming from a thug that cheered on Bush while he was busy forcing upon us his liberticidal policies, including snooping on communications, no fly lists, etc ...

Not only is everyone expected to work but fixed expenses like transportation, child care, health care, local nickel and dime regressive taxes, etc .. have increased much faster than family income (even more so when considering that inflation is systematically understated thanks to creative cooking of books). These findings aren't equivocal despite refusal by clowns to even acknowledge they exist. [video:youtube]akVL7QY0S8A Just watch JayB not even address Warren's work and later on keep pretending there are no data pointing to the demise of the middle class.

What? no appeal to niceties from the red-baiting goon squad today? How many commies did you root out today? Nice hat btw:

and you claim that my reading comprehension is poor? I expect better from you Tvash, seriously.

Same as the other folks of course. It's all same-same, don't you read jbs posts? Jbs got it this way Obama = Bush. In fact, hard to argue with him as many of this Presidents policys and appointees are identical to the last one. Same as it ever was. No. I never said that Obama was the same as Bush. I said that all of the important decisions Obama made this year favored the corporate status quo. I believe Obama is center-right, i.e. a technocrat/3rd-way/corporatist (a la Blair/Clinton) pseudo Democrat whereas Bush was hard right. Obama will respond to some extent to genuine populist pressures to do the right thing, if said pressure materializes. In the same situation, Bush would demonize genuine populists and eventually would send in the mercenaries and the National Guard to squelch any velleity of dissent.

You'd be surprised. I am quite jovial. What else do you see in your crystal ball today? How is my fortune doing?

well, I didn't say the absolute worse today is worse than during the great depression (although the life expectancy of inner city black youth gives me pause) and I don't think it should be the gauge of what is bad enough to consider that the situation is very bad. The dust bowl was also a combination of depression economics and natural disaster (mostly avoidable if land speculators had been reigned in).

thanks to junk food one can be dirt poor and fat (what's the fatsoes distribution with income? aren't they strongly inversely correlated). there is "progress" for you.

isn't the "market" saturated?

other direction like in the ~55% who voted in Oregon 2 days ago to increase taxes on the wealthy and corps or is it the ~82% of Mass voters who want medicare for everyone?

no wonder the Democrats aren't coming through if they think the situation isn't that bad because it was tougher during the civil war.