quick question
What is a good source for the share of HMO dollars that goes to care rather than profits or overhead? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: quick question
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004, Michael Perelman wrote: What is a good source for the share of HMO dollars that goes to care rather than profits or overhead? Just about anything written by Steffie Woolhandler of Physicians for a National Health Plan (http://www.pnhp.org) Here's a short one: http://www.pnhp.org/news/high.pdf [F]or-profit HMOs take 19% for overhead, versus 13% for non-profit plans, 3% in the US Medicare program and 1% in Canadian Medicare. She's got 2 footnotes to go with it. She also had a great interview with Doug where she summarized an article she published (I think in the New England Journal of Medicine) that analyzed and compared the cost structure in lots of great ways: http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Radio_1.html#020711 I seem to remember that in that interview she gave astonishing figures for the range of HMO overhead rates, that they ran from a low of 12% to a high of 34%. If it wasn't in here, it was in another interview. Michael
Re: quick question
I had been looking at my notes on her work, but could not find anything recent. Thank you very much. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: quick question
You should not send in such nice quotes without giving a more precise source so that I can steal them. .. From a rhetorical standpoint, a description is a verbal representation of some object to some audience, such that the speaker is able to change the audience's attitude toward the object without changing the object itself. Thus, the trick for any would-be describer is to contain the effects of her discourse so that the object remains intact once her discourse is done. In descriptions of human behavior, this is often very difficult to manage, as the people being described, once informed of the description, may become upset and proceed to subvert the describer's authority. [Steve Fuller] 'perceptual fault lines' run through apparently stable communities that appear to have agreed on basic institutions and structures and on general governing rules. Consent comes apart in battles of description. Consent comes apart over whose stories to tell. [Kim Scheppele] -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: quick question
- Original Message - From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] You should not send in such nice quotes without giving a more precise source so that I can steal them. == Quote #2 is in the archives as similar issues have come up before: [Kim Scheppele in Another Look at the Problem of Rent Seeking by Steven Medema, Journal of Economic Issues Vol xxv # 4] Quote#1: Steve Fuller Philosophy, Rhetoric the End of Knowledge: The Coming of Science and Technology Studies. U Wisconsin Press, 1993, p. 95] .. From a rhetorical standpoint, a description is a verbal representation of some object to some audience, such that the speaker is able to change the audience's attitude toward the object without changing the object itself. Thus, the trick for any would-be describer is to contain the effects of her discourse so that the object remains intact once her discourse is done. In descriptions of human behavior, this is often very difficult to manage, as the people being described, once informed of the description, may become upset and proceed to subvert the describer's authority. [Steve Fuller] 'perceptual fault lines' run through apparently stable communities that appear to have agreed on basic institutions and structures and on general governing rules. Consent comes apart in battles of description. Consent comes apart over whose stories to tell. [Kim Scheppele] -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: quick question
- Original Message - From: Carrol Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] Eubulides wrote: Right but the dictionary entry is saying 1873. I'm reading a review of Heckscher's book [it's Tuesday and I don't have a tv :-)] and I'm asking in an historiographical and nominalist sense... OED Online gives first date as 1838. But I can't find their bibliography of sources so I don't know what kind of asource they took the quote from. New Moral World 22 Dec. 142/2. I don't have the foggiest idea what the New Moral World was. For mercantile system the earliest source given, as Michael says, is Smith. Carrol Thanks for the above Carrol. Here's a tidbit from one of Lars Magnusson's papers: Quoting a guy named D C Coleman: ...what was this mercantilism? Did it exist? As a description of a trend in economic thought the term may well be useful. As a label for economic policy the term is not simply misleading, but actively confusing, a red-herring of historiography. It serves to give a false unity to disparate events, to conceal the close up reality of particular times and particular circumstances...
Re: quick question
While it's true that abstract concepts such as mercantilism can give a false unity to disparate events, to conceal the close up reality of particular times and particular circumstances... that doesn't mean that the use of such concepts _always and everywhere_ leads to such confusion, excessive abstraction, or reification. We shouldn't give in to the abstract drive to reject abstractions. We could see mercantilism as summarizing the shared characteristics of heterogeneous empirical phenomena -- while also noting the differences amongst the phenomena. Though we may need a long book like that of Hechscher to talk about mercantilism in all its variety, we could also learn something from the abstract summary at the beginning or end of that book. And leaving out those summaries -- in a vain effort ot avoid abstraction or reification -- would simply leave us with a bunch of disparate facts (a buzzing, blooming confusion) on which we'd impose our own pre-conceived theories rather than benefiting from the deductions of the author (with which we could agree or disagree). BTW, if I remember Heckscher's analysis correctly, he saw mercantilism as the economic side of absolutism, i.e., the effort by small feudal lords to unite bigger territories under their rule, to become kings running unified states. It didn't simply involve the violation of the canons of free trade theory as Smithians suggest (since trade was hardly free before mercantilism). In fact, it involved the breaking down of trade barriers (and such things as tax farming) _within_ the king's territory. It's a little like the creation of the European Common Market (or other trade blocs), which not only freed trade within its bounds but also raised the effective trade barriers vis-a-vis the non-ECM. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Eubulides [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 11:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] quick question - Original Message - From: Carrol Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] Eubulides wrote: Right but the dictionary entry is saying 1873. I'm reading a review of Heckscher's book [it's Tuesday and I don't have a tv :-)] and I'm asking in an historiographical and nominalist sense... OED Online gives first date as 1838. But I can't find their bibliography of sources so I don't know what kind of asource they took the quote from. New Moral World 22 Dec. 142/2. I don't have the foggiest idea what the New Moral World was. For mercantile system the earliest source given, as Michael says, is Smith. Carrol Thanks for the above Carrol. Here's a tidbit from one of Lars Magnusson's papers: Quoting a guy named D C Coleman: ...what was this mercantilism? Did it exist? As a description of a trend in economic thought the term may well be useful. As a label for economic policy the term is not simply misleading, but actively confusing, a red-herring of historiography. It serves to give a false unity to disparate events, to conceal the close up reality of particular times and particular circumstances...
Re: quick question
- Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] While it's true that abstract concepts such as mercantilism can give a false unity to disparate events, to conceal the close up reality of particular times and particular circumstances... that doesn't mean that the use of such concepts _always and everywhere_ leads to such confusion, excessive abstraction, or reification. We shouldn't give in to the abstract drive to reject abstractions. === My guess is that Cole was attempting to assert that we shouldn't say that those policymakers/powerholders from the 16-early 18th centuries saw themselves as mercantilists pursuing mercantilist policies. Ian
Re: quick question
My guess is that Cole was attempting to assert that we shouldn't say that those policymakers/powerholders from the 16-early 18th centuries saw themselves as mercantilists pursuing mercantilist policies. of course they didn't (since the owl of Minerva only flies after the fact). I don't think that Bush thinks of himself as a capitalist pawn pursuing capitalist policies. Jim
Re: quick question
- Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] My guess is that Cole was attempting to assert that we shouldn't say that those policymakers/powerholders from the 16-early 18th centuries saw themselves as mercantilists pursuing mercantilist policies. of course they didn't (since the owl of Minerva only flies after the fact). I don't think that Bush thinks of himself as a capitalist pawn pursuing capitalist policies. Jim Description Descriptions of descriptions Contested descriptions of descriptions of descriptions .. From a rhetorical standpoint, a description is a verbal representation of some object to some audience, such that the speaker is able to change the audience's attitude toward the object without changing the object itself. Thus, the trick for any would-be describer is to contain the effects of her discourse so that the object remains intact once her discourse is done. In descriptions of human behavior, this is often very difficult to manage, as the people being described, once informed of the description, may become upset and proceed to subvert the describer's authority. [Steve Fuller] 'perceptual fault lines' run through apparently stable communities that appear to have agreed on basic institutions and structures and on general governing rules. Consent comes apart in battles of description. Consent comes apart over whose stories to tell. [Kim Scheppele]
Re: quick question
are you disagreeing? what _are_ you saying? why should we agree with these people? I wrote: I don't think that Bush thinks of himself as a capitalist pawn pursuing capitalist policies. Ian writes: Description Descriptions of descriptions Contested descriptions of descriptions of descriptions .. From a rhetorical standpoint, a description is a verbal representation of some object to some audience, such that the speaker is able to change the audience's attitude toward the object without changing the object itself. Thus, the trick for any would-be describer is to contain the effects of her discourse so that the object remains intact once her discourse is done. In descriptions of human behavior, this is often very difficult to manage, as the people being described, once informed of the description, may become upset and proceed to subvert the describer's authority. [Steve Fuller] 'perceptual fault lines' run through apparently stable communities that appear to have agreed on basic institutions and structures and on general governing rules. Consent comes apart in battles of description. Consent comes apart over whose stories to tell. [Kim Scheppele]
Re: quick question
- Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 2:10 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] quick question are you disagreeing? what _are_ you saying? why should we agree with these people? What does it mean to say they were mercantilists if that is merely one form of ex post description amongst possible others [and no I'm not providing a cluster of counterfactuals to serve as the basis for a different narrative]? Whose description trumps given Quine-Duhem? Ian
Re: quick question
I asked: are you disagreeing? what _are_ you saying? why should we agree with these people? Ian: What does it mean to say they were mercantilists if that is merely one form of ex post description amongst possible others [and no I'm not providing a cluster of counterfactuals to serve as the basis for a different narrative]? It means that I think that one theory (that there is something called mercantilism which describes shared characteristics of pre-19th century Western European state economic policies) works in the sense that it allows more understanding of the phenomena than simply avoiding theory altogether (which is impossible, anyway). If there are better theories, I'd like to hear of them. Whose description trumps given Quine-Duhem? I don't know what their theory of mercantilism is. My understanding is that they were both philosophers of science, not social scientists, so I doubt that they wrote anything about mercantilism. In any event, what is meant by trumping Quine-Dumen? I'm not interested in trumping a philosophy of science but instead in getting a better understanding of empirical reality (until an even better one comes along). Jim
Re: quick question
Can anyone remove how to remove PEN-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: quick question
Eubulides wrote: Right but the dictionary entry is saying 1873. I'm reading a review of Heckscher's book [it's Tuesday and I don't have a tv :-)] and I'm asking in an historiographical and nominalist sense... OED Online gives first date as 1838. But I can't find their bibliography of sources so I don't know what kind of asource they took the quote from. New Moral World 22 Dec. 142/2. I don't have the foggiest idea what the New Moral World was. For mercantile system the earliest source given, as Michael says, is Smith. Carrol
quick question
Penner's, who baptized the term mercantilism? One entry found for mercantilism. Main Entry: mer·can·til·ism Pronunciation: -tE-li-zm, -tI-, -t- Function: noun Date: 1873 1 : the theory or practice of mercantile pursuits : COMMERCIALISM 2 : an economic system developing during the decay of feudalism to unify and increase the power and especially the monetary wealth of a nation by a strict governmental regulation of the entire national economy usually through policies designed to secure an accumulation of bullion, a favorable balance of trade, the development of agriculture and manufactures, and the establishment of foreign trading monopolies - mer·can·til·ist /-list/ noun or adjective - mer·can·til·is·tic /mr-kn-tE-'lis-tik, -tI-, -t-/ adjective
Re: quick question
Smith coined the term mercantile system. On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 08:57:03PM -0700, Eubulides wrote: Penner's, who baptized the term mercantilism? One entry found for mercantilism. Main Entry: mer·can·til·ism Pronunciation: -tE-li-zm, -tI-, -t- Function: noun Date: 1873 1 : the theory or practice of mercantile pursuits : COMMERCIALISM 2 : an economic system developing during the decay of feudalism to unify and increase the power and especially the monetary wealth of a nation by a strict governmental regulation of the entire national economy usually through policies designed to secure an accumulation of bullion, a favorable balance of trade, the development of agriculture and manufactures, and the establishment of foreign trading monopolies - mer·can·til·ist /-list/ noun or adjective - mer·can·til·is·tic /mr-kn-tE-'lis-tik, -tI-, -t-/ adjective -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: quick question
Right but the dictionary entry is saying 1873. I'm reading a review of Heckscher's book [it's Tuesday and I don't have a tv :-)] and I'm asking in an historiographical and nominalist sense... - Original Message - From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 8:59 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] quick question Smith coined the term mercantile system. On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 08:57:03PM -0700, Eubulides wrote: Penner's, who baptized the term mercantilism? One entry found for mercantilism. Main Entry: mer·can·til·ism Pronunciation: -tE-li-zm, -tI-, -t- Function: noun Date: 1873 1 : the theory or practice of mercantile pursuits : COMMERCIALISM 2 : an economic system developing during the decay of feudalism to unify and increase the power and especially the monetary wealth of a nation by a strict governmental regulation of the entire national economy usually through policies designed to secure an accumulation of bullion, a favorable balance of trade, the development of agriculture and manufactures, and the establishment of foreign trading monopolies - mer·can·til·ist /-list/ noun or adjective - mer·can·til·is·tic /mr-kn-tE-'lis-tik, -tI-, -t-/ adjective -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
quick question
Can anyone tell me the maximum earnings subject to SS tax for 2002? I've searched the SSA website and can't seem to find it. Thanks. Ellen
Re: quick question
Check -- http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice/colafacts2001.htm Eric Can anyone tell me the maximum earnings subject to SS tax for 2002? I've searched the SSA website and can't seem to find it. Thanks. Ellen
Re: Re: quick question
There it is! Thanks, Eric. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Check -- http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice/colafacts2001.htm Eric Can anyone tell me the maximum earnings subject to SS tax for 2002? I've searched the SSA website and can't seem to find it. Thanks. Ellen
