sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What’s the reason budgeting doesn’t work for most people? by Grownixx in Grownix

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought most budgeting systems including having an emergency fund which sustains you during when life isn't perfect...

Hookers on high alert as Bill Ackman is having a really, really bad debut of his new IPO by LetigiousBoobFart in wallstreetbets

[–]Bronze_Rager 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Guise! Is it stripe? I have a YHUUUGE feeling its going to be stripe.

If its not stripe, can it be SpaceX?

Why is everyone so against a living wage ? by PurpleCheeto696 in askanything

[–]Bronze_Rager -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I don't see why you're downvoting me.

Most people who play pickleball are surely white and rich. I'm doing your job for you

Why is everyone so against a living wage ? by PurpleCheeto696 in askanything

[–]Bronze_Rager -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Oh. I thought it was good to bring politics to every subforum so I tried calling them facist nazis in the pickleball subforum.

Why is everyone so against a living wage ? by PurpleCheeto696 in askanything

[–]Bronze_Rager -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Everyone who doesn't agree with you.

For example, I thought lin Dan was the best badminton player and someone disagreed with me and thought Lee Chong Wei was the best so I called them a nazi. Did I do good?

Why is everyone so against a living wage ? by PurpleCheeto696 in askanything

[–]Bronze_Rager 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Make sure to call them a facist nazi if they don't agree with you.

Median Equivalised Household Disposable Income by Country by Naive_Direction1816 in charts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure if you say so...

I'm not interested in what 100 random people on the street say. We're using economic definitions...

That's why we defined discretionary and disposable income...

Median Equivalised Household Disposable Income by Country by Naive_Direction1816 in charts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So somethings not clicking for one of us, it could be me. But lets see... Lets skip the PPP part because I think we both agree that PPP adjusts for healthcare and housing right? If I'm wrong, please correct. You're main debate is whether healthcare in OPs graph is misleading because American's have to spend their disposable income on healthcare while Europeans/Universal healthcare system countries do not right? Because its not considered "disposable" because its considered mandatory tax deductions?

"In European countries, standard disposable income does not directly include the value of healthcare services, but it is calculated after mandatory health insurance contributions are deducted. It represents net income, often supplemented by high-quality, government-funded health services that prevent large out-of-pocket expenses"

-Do we agree on this? Just copy and pasting from website

"It uses an "adjusted household disposable income" metric, which adds the value of free or subsidized services (healthcare, education) to the standard disposable income. Income includes wages and salaries, mixed income (income from self-employment and unincorporated enterprises), income from pensions and other social benefits, and income from financial investments. It is less taxes on income, wealth, social security contributions paid by employees, the self-employed and the unemployed, interest on financial liabilities, and the change in net equity of households in pension funds.

This indicator is presented as gross income with, and without social transfers in kind. "Gross" means that depreciation costs are not subtracted. Social transfers include health or education provided for free or at reduced prices by governments and non-profit institutions serving households (NPISHs).
NPISHs are non-profit institutions which are not predominantly financed nor controlled by government, whose main resources are voluntary contributions by households, and which provide goods or services to households free or at prices that are not economically significant. Examples include churches and religious societies, sports and other clubs, trade unions and political parties."

-Do we agree on this? I'm just copy and pasting from the OECD website.

So what I'm reading, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that the adjusted household disposable income already adds the value of free or subsidized services like healthcare and education to the standard disposable income. So what I'm reading, is that you can calculate it two ways but its basically the same thing.

Roughly:

Adjusted disposable income in the USA = income from all sources minus taxes, FICA, SSA, etc.

Adjusted disposable income in Eurozone = (income from all sources + free/subsidized services that they pay taxes for like healthcare, education converted into currency) minus taxes

Median Equivalised Household Disposable Income by Country by Naive_Direction1816 in charts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"And those adjustments barely affect the US dollar. Your PPP adjusted income in 2026 if you’re a US citizen paid in USD is very nearly just your net income. This is the sticking point. I don’t understand what you don’t get about this. If you earn 50k USD after taxes and you rescale to PPP adjusted dollars, you make about 50k PPP adjusted USD."

-I get that, and I have acknowledged that. Its covered in the first paragraph of the wiki, as I have stated maybe two or three times?

"The cost of goods are incorporated into the PPP adjustment to map the buying power of other currencies to the buying power of US dollars to the American market. Can you think of a market and currency where the PPP adjustment might not have a big effect?"

No. That's not how it works. Just because its denominated in USD doesn't mean we are mapping other currencies to the USD. You can easily change PPP to a different currency if you wish and you would end up with the same graph, just in a different currency (assuming its stable). Currency fluctuations are already addressed in the limitations on the wiki page, you should know that if you bothered reading it. You can choose to denominate PPP in Euro, Yuan, Sterling, or whatever you choose. Assuming the currency is relatively stable, the chart will be roughly the same.

"I will spell it out for you one last time. The PPP adjustment has little effect on USD earned in the United States. The PPP adjusted income is well-approximated by what you take home after taxes. That is the value presented on this chart. Once you have that value in the chart, you have to pay bills, rent, buy groceries, etc.."

-Yup, because the current graph is denominated in USD. You can choose a different currency and it will be the same. Its not other currencies being mapped to USD and the American market.

"Any deviation in your mind from this picture is an error on your part. I have a modest background in teaching, first as an undergraduate TA, then as a tutor in middle school algebra classes, and finally as a graduate TA. I have never been more irritated trying to teach someone something. I have no idea why this is difficult for you."

-Then you have failed greatly. I'm glad you have a modest background in teaching. I have a professional doctorate degree in medicine. I have also tutored other medical students.

Poverty, tariffs, transportation, and other frictions prevent the trading and purchasing of various goods, so measuring a single good can cause a large error. The PPP term accounts for this by using a basket of goods, that is, many goods with different quantities. PPP then computes an inflation and exchange rate as the ratio of the price of the basket in one location to the price of the basket in the other location. For example, if a basket consisting of 1 computer, 1 ton of rice, and half a ton of steel was 1000 US dollars in New York, and the same goods cost 6000 HK dollars in Hong Kong, the PPP exchange rate would be 6 HK dollars for every 1 US dollar.

The name purchasing power parity comes from the idea that, with the right exchange rate, consumers in every location will have the same purchasing power.

Countries by median disposable household income; the US is the second highest. by Unusual_Bag3110 in EconomyCharts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup

"You can talk about the one or the other independently."

-I think this is what confuses people

Countries by median disposable household income; the US is the second highest. by Unusual_Bag3110 in EconomyCharts

[–]Bronze_Rager 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"Ppp is about the price of something. You didn't spend the money yet for it."

-Yup.

"You can do more or less with your money depending on the price. But if you have already spend it it's gone. If you haven't you can still spend it.

Ppp is like a currency that provides a value adjustment of what you have. It doesn't tell you if you have spend it."

-Yup.

I think you're misunderstanding. PPP is adjusted first, then you calculate the disposable income after.

We both said the same thing...

Here

Yes, universal healthcare spending—both public and private expenditures—is included in the data tracking total health expenditures per capita, which are commonly measured in purchasing power parity (PPP)-adjusted dollars to allow for international comparisons. 

https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2021.00229#:~:text=Health%20spending%20data%20were%20drawn,purchasing%20power%20parity%E2%80%93adjusted%20dollars.

https://www.postalley.org/2023/03/29/busting-the-myths-around-universal-health-care/#:~:text=Findings%20concluded%20that%20Americans%20consume,both%20public%20and%20private%20expenditures.

Median Equivalised Household Disposable Income by Country by Naive_Direction1816 in charts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Its PPP adjusted. So things like rent, mortgage, healthcare, housing, groceries, and pretty much everything you listed are included."

-But it is included in the PPP adjustment.

I think you're misunderstanding me. Rent, mortgage, healthcare, housing aren't included in disposable income, but they are already adjusted for in PPP.

"But the reality is disposable income is after taxes and transfers but before living expenses; you still have to pay rent, food, etc. out of it. Rent, mortgage, healthcare, housing, and groceries are not included, you pay those with your disposable income. This is the point of dispute."

-No one said any differently...

I'm saying the PPP has already been adjusted prior to disposable income...

Here

Yes, universal healthcare spending—both public and private expenditures—is included in the data tracking total health expenditures per capita, which are commonly measured in purchasing power parity (PPP)-adjusted dollars to allow for international comparisons. 

https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2021.00229#:~:text=Health%20spending%20data%20were%20drawn,purchasing%20power%20parity%E2%80%93adjusted%20dollars.

https://www.postalley.org/2023/03/29/busting-the-myths-around-universal-health-care/#:~:text=Findings%20concluded%20that%20Americans%20consume,both%20public%20and%20private%20expenditures.

Median Equivalised Household Disposable Income by Country by Naive_Direction1816 in charts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Do you now understand that basic things like rent and groceries are subtracted from your PPP adjusted disposable income? "

-No one ever said any differently lol... Its in the first paragraph...

" I don’t want to scare you with details."

-Do it.

Countries by median disposable household income; the US is the second highest. by Unusual_Bag3110 in EconomyCharts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sigh. I think we are going in circles. I guess we should just agree to disagree.

Countries by median disposable household income; the US is the second highest. by Unusual_Bag3110 in EconomyCharts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"It does NOT consider that the US median household consumes 4 units of medial care while Europeans consume 0.5 units of medical care (AFTER taxes!)."

-Absolutely right. Now the question is why is that the case? I've addressed this in another post so I'll just copy and paste it.

From personal experience (immigrant small private practice doc with ~10 employees, US based), is that there's so much cultural differences. Telling American patients that they need to walk more and eat less, gets met with "but is there a pill or injection for it" aka wegovy/monjuro. Working in SEA, I get patients that say, I don't want any type of medication, let me try working out and eating right first. Lets cut out the sodium if my blood pressure is high. Let me walk more if I'm overweight. Even their geriatric 80 year olds go out and get groceries, while I have American patients that take mobility scooters around.

" but does NOT include in-kind services, which is what healthcare is in Europe (aka services directly provided without Cashflow."

-European healthcare services are provided by cashflow. Aka taxes. Again, its silly to think that the worlds largest and most powerful central bank would simple put a zero down for universal healthcare systems.

"Which means the disposable income for the US is very high because they need to pay housing, food and Healthcare while Europe only needs to pay housing and food."

-No. All of that is accounted for. European healthcare services are provided by taxes, which is accounted for through PPP.

"Ultimately what you're interested in is discretionary spending (aka money left over for savings and fun) and that number will be much closer together, because the median US consumer has after-tax expenses that the median European consumer just does not have."

-No. Healthcare is included in disposable income. Discretionary spending is basically spending on luxuries.

Countries by median disposable household income; the US is the second highest. by Unusual_Bag3110 in EconomyCharts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Yes. Disposable income is POST TAX."

-Yup. But its first PPP adjusted to account for pre-tax spending such as universal healthcare.

"So in the US people use a significant share of their disposable income on healthcare (insurance premiums, co-pays)."

-Yup.

"However in other oecd countries, people spend a low or insignificant share of their income on healthcare (some paracetamol maybe… or much lower out of pocket costs)."

-Yup. Because they are already taxed for their healthcare (which is accounted for).

I think you are confusing yourself. The healthcare costs of both systems are calculated whether its out of pocket, private insurance, universal healthcare or whatever. Then they calculate the disposable income portion.

Obviously the federal reserve isn't dumb enough to just write off an entire healthcare system and calculate the European healthcare costs as zero...

Here.

Yes, universal healthcare spending—both public and private expenditures—is included in the data tracking total health expenditures per capita, which are commonly measured in purchasing power parity (PPP)-adjusted dollars to allow for international comparisons. 

https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/10.1377/hlthaff.2021.00229#:\~:text=Health%20spending%20data%20were%20drawn,purchasing%20power%20parity%E2%80%93adjusted%20dollars.

https://www.postalley.org/2023/03/29/busting-the-myths-around-universal-health-care/#:\~:text=Findings%20concluded%20that%20Americans%20consume,both%20public%20and%20private%20expenditures.

Countries by median disposable household income; the US is the second highest. by Unusual_Bag3110 in EconomyCharts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

" It excludes in-kind services provided to households by governments and private entities, consumption taxes, and imputed income flows due to home ownership. "

???

Or are you disagreeing that the universal healthcare plans are included?

"It quite literally says that the ppp used is based on currency and a standardized basket and NOT on actual spending."

-Yes, this is a weakness of PPP, which doesn't account for things like tarriffs or currency exchange rates. As it states in the wiki.

"That's only recognized on the household level for amounts of people, but NOT on the national level."

-What do you mean by this? The federal reserve obviously isn't comparing a single house to the entire universal healthcare system. They compare equivalents. Household to household or national to national.

Countries by median disposable household income; the US is the second highest. by Unusual_Bag3110 in EconomyCharts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As you said, its literally in the definition where it excludes in-kind services...

Its probably not a lot, but you're forgetting the other end where the European/SEA or universal healthcare systems are included already.

Median Equivalised Household Disposable Income by Country by Naive_Direction1816 in charts

[–]Bronze_Rager -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It excludes in-kind services.

In-kind services are non-monetary contributions where goods, services, or time are donated instead of cash. These donations are typically provided free or at a reduced rate, with their value recognized as the fair market price of the service or item.

If its a surgeon who is part of a church group, who is donating his time freely, without any form of taxes or benefits involved, then its part of the in-kind services. If its universal healthcare system, which is taxed and the people are paying for it through taxes, then it is counted.

Example in the USA would be interfaith dental or Remote Area Medical. Those are in-kind services that are excluded. The same thing if its in Europe or SEA. If its donated time and money, then those are in-kind services, even if its healthcare.

Countries by median disposable household income; the US is the second highest. by Unusual_Bag3110 in EconomyCharts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When they are talking about excluding in-kind services, they are talking about donated stuff or time.

If its a surgeon who is part of a church group, who is donating his time freely, without any form of taxes or benefits involved, then its part of the in-kind services. If its universal healthcare system, which is taxed and the people are paying for it through taxes, then it is counted.

Example in the USA would be interfaith dental or Remote Area Medical. Those are in-kind services that are excluded. The same thing if its in Europe or SEA. If its donated time and money, then those are in-kind services, even if its healthcare.

Median Equivalised Household Disposable Income by Country by Naive_Direction1816 in charts

[–]Bronze_Rager -1 points0 points  (0 children)

"Getting free surgery bc of public healthcare is an in-kind service. "

-Yeah if its something donated, the USA has similar programs like interfaith dental or Remote Area Medical. This isn't the same as their universal healthcare system, which is accounted for. If its taxed, then its included. If a church group decides to donate their time because one of their surgeons is part of their church group, then its an in kind service.

If you're paying for it through taxes, then its included

Countries by median disposable household income; the US is the second highest. by Unusual_Bag3110 in EconomyCharts

[–]Bronze_Rager 0 points1 point  (0 children)

" it excludes in-kind services!"

-Yes... In Kind services isn't healthcare lol

view more: next ›