Breaking: Biden will not seek re-election

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

You're projecting your own stamina for internet arguments onto others here.

Um, how dare you?

I could go for 30.

[SutterBrother]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I'd be curious to see the data on that. Everything I've seen points to stagnant real income across most income levels. Median real income, median household income, and disposable income have all been flat or have declined in the last 4-5 years. GDP per capita has gone up, but given that income hasn't, that would suggest that any wealth that's getting generated is finding its way into asset prices rather than wages.

And of course, it's not just a question of money. US life expectancy is downright awful at this point. The US's 2023 Health-Adjusted Life Expectancy is now 69th in the world, and is closer to Iraq, Syria, Guatemala, and Cambodia than it is to Canada's. And they are 180th of 183 countries in terms of improvement in that metric since the year 2000, ahead of only Venezuela, Dominican Republic, and Sudan, gaining only 0.3 years in that period.

Do you have a link to this data? I can't find it in a cursory google search.

I see a few articles indicating a drop in US life expectancy due to the pandemic, but most sources cite it's rebounded since, so I'm genuinely curious.

[Fuzz]

This would be a great time to lock the thread, too.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by SutterBrother

Do you have a link to this data? I can't find it in a cursory google search.

I see a few articles indicating a drop in US life expectancy due to the pandemic, but most sources cite it's rebounded since, so I'm genuinely curious.

It was just the Wikipedia article for life expectancy by country here. Though looking at it again, I realized the Health-Adjusted Life Expectancy numbers I was quoting were from 2019, not 2023. In a way that's good because it excludes COVID effects, though it's not the most recent data.

In terms of 2023 numbers, they have rebounded from COVID, but so have other countries. They're still at the bottom among industrialized countries, and their male life expectancy is particularly dire, nearly 4 years lower than the average of the other G7 nations.

And these overall numbers kind of hide the inequality within the country. California, Washington, most of New England, etc. have life expectancies that are just below most industrialized nations. But then you have most of the south and other red states where life expectancy is on par with Russia, Nicaragua, Bulgaria, etc. And then a lot of the swing states are quite low too.

[SutterBrother]

Originally Posted by opendoor

It was just the Wikipedia article for life expectancy by country here. Though looking at it again, I realized the Health-Adjusted Life Expectancy numbers I was quoting were from 2019, not 2023. In a way that's good because it excludes COVID effects, though it's not the most recent data.

In terms of 2023 numbers, they have rebounded from COVID, but so have other countries. They're still at the bottom among industrialized countries, and their male life expectancy is particularly dire, nearly 4 years lower than the average of the other G7 nations.

And these overall numbers kind of hide the inequality within the country. California, Washington, most of New England, etc. have life expectancies that are just below most industrialized nations. But then you have most of the south and other red states where life expectancy is on par with Russia, Nicaragua, Bulgaria, etc. And then a lot of the swing states are quite low too.

Thanks appreciate the additional detail. My eyebrows were up re: Sudan and Iraq, but red vs blue isn't offside.

Socialized healthcare FTW Canada (and every other modern western democracy)

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by opendoor

And these overall numbers kind of hide the inequality within the country. California, Washington, most of New England, etc. have life expectancies that are just below most industrialized nations. But then you have most of the south and other red states where life expectancy is on par with Russia, Nicaragua, Bulgaria, etc. And then a lot of the swing states are quite low too.

Unsurprisingly, life expectancy by U.S. state maps pretty closely to obesity rates. But red state health care policies no doubt play a big part as well.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

From the U.S. Treasury report:

I guess it really depends on what period people talk about and whether you use seasonally adjusted numbers or not. They seem to be using Q3 2019 as the pre-pandemic baseline, but I'd think Q1 2020 would be the better one. Yeah, the pandemic really kicked into gear right at the end of that quarter, but if you look at monthly data, March was still quite normal in terms of wages.

So using that as the baseline, real wages are up 0.3% since then, in a period where GDP per capita went up 7.6%. If you go back to Q4 2019, then it looks a bit better with real wages up 1.5%. But again GDP per capita growth was many times higher, and it still pales in comparison to the ~8.5% real wage growth Americans saw in the 4.5 years before the pandemic.

I'm not saying what they're feeling is rational or anything, but if you basically shut your brain off and just compare wage growth and inflation under the two Presidents, Trump clearly comes out ahead.

International comparison.

Spoiler!

That seems odd; they say 2.8% for the US, but its the same data and same time period that produces the 1.7% number further up the page. And calculating the data myself, I get 1.7%.

And again, it's out of date. So to use Canada as a comparison, real wages have risen 3.1% since Q3 2019 in Canada, which is higher than the US's 1.7% over the same period. And think of all the economic angst people have in Canada, yet our real wage growth has been nearly double the US's. So is it a surprise that people feel similarly down there when we have faster wage growth and lower inflation here?

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by SutterBrother

Thanks appreciate the additional detail. My eyebrows were up re: Sudan and Iraq, but red vs blue isn't offside.

Socialized healthcare FTW Canada (and every other modern western democracy)

I also just realized I mis-typed the Sudan example. I meant Syria.

And to be fair to the US, developing nations will tend to score higher on that metric, which is the increase in Health-Adjusted Life Expectancy from 2000-2019, because they have further to go up. But the US adding only 0.3 years when every other comparable industrialized nation added 2-4 years illustrates that while they have good economic growth, their quality of life isn't improving at nearly the same rate (or even the same rate as their peer nations) which will tend to create angst.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I can't believe I have to do this, but for #### sakes, if you are going to be a goddamned idiot and tell me to take the loss, I'm not going to walk away.







If you want to tell me what kind of math makes $2.420 half of 3.576 I'm all ears.

It's almost frustrating where you cut this graph off, because we should also remember that when Biden took office prices were in the midst of climb back from a dip to a 15 year low during the pandemic, a number approaching 3 would have just been regression to the mean at the time he took office. and $3.445 would fit just slightly below a 35 year trend line.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Unsurprisingly, life expectancy by U.S. state maps pretty closely to obesity rates. But red state health care policies no doubt play a big part as well.

It's also insanely correlated with wealth (which obesity is too). Among males, those in the top 1% of income percentile live about 15 years longer than the bottom earners. Most countries have a much flatter curve, so the median isn't nearly as far from the extremes.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

As someone living in the States, there is so much projecting of Canadian political thinking in this discussion, it’s actually hilarious. There is shockingly little understanding of the American political landscape and why the polls look like they do.

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Completely agree with the bolded and have been saying this for years. Thank you for acknowledging the same. The disconnect is what makes these discussions so painful to read at times.

there are many people that simply want to vote for Trump - because he owns the libs and says the ignorant #### they haven't had the sack in the past to say themselves. I classify those people as dumb Americans, not for what they say, but because the policies they support hurt them as badly - many times more - than the libs they are hoping Trump will own. That is stupid. When you vote for someone that is going to hurt you, that is just plan ####ing stupid.

Something here is not quite adding up. You guys say I am "projecting of Canadian political thinking" and "not understanding the American political landscape". You wag your finger at me, accusing me of calling American voters idiots. You say there are rational reasons for why people are voting for Trump. But then you acknowledge that there are dumb reasons why people are voting for Trump, and that they are voting for someone who is actually hurting them.

It all comes across to me as a confusing mess. No, in all honesty there are no rational reasons to vote for Trump, and I'm not going to pretend that there are just to make Americans happy. Me saying that is not some "Canadian bias" or whatever; all it takes to come to that conclusion is a sober look at Trump and his plans for the country if/when he retakes power.

If I say 2+2=4, and you respond saying "but most Americans say 2+2=5!!! Stop with your Canadian elitism and get off your high horse!!!" What is my response supposed to be?

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by #-3

It's almost frustrating where you cut this graph off, because we should also remember that when Biden took office prices were in the midst of climb back from a dip to a 15 year low during the pandemic, a number approaching 3 would have just been regression to the mean at the time he took office. and $3.445 would fit just slightly below a 35 year trend line.

All of this is fine. And accurate. As are the other economic indicators. And all of us who have the time and opportunity to post on message boards all day long probably aren't the ones now working two jobs to support their family. Show that person your graph and analysis, if you can catch them outside of the 80 hours they spend a week between work, family and household duties. The point is that it's easy to see why a lot of people want something different. Instead of the current administration getting the credit for economic recovery, it gets the blame for some tough years for the 'middle'. Which is probably a typical response. I'm hopeful that Harris represents something different.

This is a good read
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/the-m...160132853.html

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Unsurprisingly, life expectancy by U.S. state maps pretty closely to obesity rates. But red state health care policies no doubt play a big part as well.

Actually, the confounding variables are level of education and income. Those are the big predictors of health outcomes. Obesity tends to be a byproduct of those indicators.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

All of this is fine. And accurate. As are the other economic indicators. And all of us who have the time and opportunity to post on message boards all day long probably aren't the ones now working two jobs to support their family. Show that person your graph and analysis, if you can catch them outside of the 80 hours they spend a week between work, family and household duties. The point is that it's easy to see why a lot of people want something different. Instead of the current administration getting the credit for economic recovery, it gets the blame for some tough years for the 'middle'. Which is probably a typical response. I'm hopeful that Harris represents something different.

This is a good read
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/the-m...160132853.html

On top of it a message board that did a vote and found out that most people wasting their time here are in the higher income level.

Nothing like standing on top and snubbing your nose down at those deplorables that can't pay for fuel and food.

But then again, Canadians have been voting out government for years because of things like not being able to provide for their family, and there have always been other Canadians who sit there and snub their nose because they can't for the life of them figure out why someone won't foot for their beloved hockey team. I mean political party.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

The hard truth that some people don’t want to hear is that a significant portion of the population, life was better under Trump, and that’s going to influence how they vote.

Let's say you max out all your credit cards, take out a line of credit, and take all that money with you to Vegas and have a really, really fun weekend. You might spend the rest of your life thinking fondly of that weekend, wanting the rest of your life to always be like that weekend. But in reality you're steeped in the long term consequences of having that weekend. And no matter how badly you want to go back to having that kind of fun, you're probably not going to anytime soon, if ever.

Maybe not the best analogy, but it gets the point across. Trump put the economy on a sugar high by slashing taxes, where the vast majority of the benefits went to the top 1%. But the long term consequences of the tax cut was inevitably going to be inflation. Each year there was an amount of money that normally would have been removed from the economy via taxation, that wasn't removed, so with each passing year you got an ever-increasing amount of money staying in the economy. Not surprisingly, this put huge upward pressure on prices across the board. Couple this with greedflation, supply chain problems related to the pandemic, and Putin's war in Ukraine, and you had a perfect storm of inflationary forces.

Do I think the American electorate is going to realize this before November? Some will, but many will not. But it doesn't change what the truth is.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Actually, the confounding variables are level of education and income. Those are the big predictors of health outcomes. Obesity tends to be a byproduct of those indicators.

Culture plays a big part. Lots of places in the developed world where working class and poor people are not routinely obese. Low-income, low-education Italians and Czechs have ready access to cheap soda. But they don’t drink a litre of it a day, every day.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Azure

On top of it a message board that did a vote and found out that most people wasting their time here are in the higher income level.

You know what they say about people in glass houses throwing stones...

Nothing like standing on top and snubbing your nose down at those deplorables that can't pay for fuel and food.

Just a wild thought... maybe people who can't pay for fuel and food should stop voting for people who make it harder for them to pay for fuel and food?

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Culture plays a big part. Lots of places in the developed world where working class and poor people are not routinely obese. Low-income, low-education Italians and Czechs have ready access to cheap soda. But they don’t drink a litre of it a day, every day.

I think a large difference is that people walk a lot more in Europe as well.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Culture plays a big part. Lots of places in the developed world where working class and poor people are not routinely obese. Low-income, low-education Italians and Czechs have ready access to cheap soda. But they don’t drink a litre of it a day, every day.

I thought we were talking about the U.S.? If you start looking globally you have to really account for a lot of confounders. Simple things like "consistent access to fish/meat or alternative high protein food" account for a lot of longevity issues too.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

I thought we were talking about the U.S.? If you start looking globally you have to really account for a lot of confounders. Simple things like "consistent access to fish/meat or alternative high protein food" account for a lot of longevity issues too.

I think that is all part of the culture element. In many European countries, people still prefer to buy their bread at a bakery, their meat from a butcher, and produce from the market. Big mega stores exist, but it's not the preference for a lot of people over there. A big part of that is also that more cities and towns there are walkable, so you don't need that central point to do everything.

Contrast that with big North American chains, like Wal-Mart for example. People go there for everything and systematically go up and down every aisle. The junk food aisles are strategically located right in between the basic items like dairy, meat, and staples like rice and pasta. It's set up to drive traffic that way, and while people can resist it, it tempts people. It's like exiting through the gift shop. People get the desire to reward themselves with tasty junk food.