Progressive overload

340 posts

Progressive overload

Progressive overload

@pdbarnsley

Economist, consumer advocate

Seattle Katılım Ekim 2017
1 Takip Edilen6 Takipçiler
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@extramsg @mattyglesias What do US consumers *think* they're buying when they spend a lot on healthcare? Do they get more of that? You can slice health outcomes a lot of ways, but there aren't really any where the US is a huge positive outlier.
English
0
0
0
27
Matthew Yglesias
Matthew Yglesias@mattyglesias·
Interesting questions like "is America a huge outlier on health care spending?" end up hinging on really tedious questions like "do you plot the axes logarithmically?"
Sylvain Catherine@sc_cath

La raison pour laquelle les Etats-Unis consacrent une part plus importante de leur PIB à la santé est que cette dernière est un bien supérieur: une forme de consommation dont la part dans le budget des ménages croit plus que proportionnellement avec leur niveau de revenu. À travers l’ensemble des pays de l’OCDE, une hausse de 1% du PIB se traduit par une hausse de 1,8% des dépenses de santé. La relation log-linéaire des dépenses de santé avec le PIB par habitant est très robuste et les États-Unis sont au niveau attendu étant donné leur richesse. C’est vrai à travers tant de systèmes différents que ça n’a à l’évidence pas de rapport avec la thèse de Boris Vallaud. Ce qui ne dit rien de l’efficacité de leur système ou du nôtre par ailleurs.

English
32
10
365
73.2K
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@SashaGusevPosts @mattyglesias "as long as there exists a mathematical transformation which makes something not an outlier, it is not actually an outlier". I think that's Spurious' Law, right? Do residents of Manhattan spend more than 100% of their income on health care?
English
1
0
1
92
Sasha Gusev
Sasha Gusev@SashaGusevPosts·
@mattyglesias this took a weird tangent when, as you noted, what matters a lot is whether you log transform the axes
Sasha Gusev tweet mediaSasha Gusev tweet media
English
2
0
5
1.1K
Matthew Yglesias
Matthew Yglesias@mattyglesias·
Health consumption correlates with non-health consumption across the OECD, though if you limit yourself to Europe the relationship is greatly attenuated.
Matthew Yglesias tweet mediaMatthew Yglesias tweet media
English
5
2
29
16.5K
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@mattyglesias Spot the nation which is simply “purchasing more health care, because it is very rich, nothing to see here “
Progressive overload tweet media
English
1
0
2
261
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@eslo_dev @mattyglesias Buddy, I’m a health economist, I read it (well the first three quarters, he starts repeating himself pretty early) years ago. You’re welcome to refresh my memory on the finer points. Like, does he resolve the absence of points close to the US using sub national analyses?
English
1
0
0
31
Eslo
Eslo@eslo_dev·
You “read” a 200 page article in 10 minutes…? What’s even the point of lying about something like that? It was evident from the first reply you hadn’t read it. Your follow up tweet isn’t even addressing what the graph shows, nor what the article largely addresses… Seriously, what’s the point? Why the meaningless lie? What changes?
English
1
0
0
34
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@AlexanderTurok @mattyglesias Is it *one of the things* that affect outcomes? Weird to spend so much on it if it’s not. Weird to be a huge positive outlier on spending and a huge negative outlier on outcomes if it does. What are we getting for all that money? Where’s the health?
English
0
0
0
41
Alexander Turok
Alexander Turok@AlexanderTurok·
@pdbarnsley @mattyglesias >Does the US consume a lot of healthcare? Or does it just *spend* a lot on healthcare? You can tell the difference by looking at outcomes. I hope you're not an actual economist because that's just ridiculous. Health spending is not the only thing to affect outcomes.
English
1
0
1
47
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@eslo_dev @mattyglesias Sure. Read it. Those are my questions having done so. Can you, having also read it, answer them. Follow up: what are Americans *getting* for all that money? What kinds of health impacts are they buying, that Norway can’t afford?
English
1
0
0
40
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@eslo_dev @mattyglesias You absolutely cannot run naive curve fitting analysis when the value of interest is a huge outlier like this. Would a group that’s much richer than the US spend more than 100% of its income on healthcare? Those guys exist, we could check…
English
1
0
0
71
Eslo
Eslo@eslo_dev·
@mattyglesias Again… look at the R2 value. Not sure if this is unfamiliar for you, but have a read here for a very thorough, very well reasoned analysis that covers various aspects of healthcare spending, including this very question and graph. randomcriticalanalysis.com/2018/11/19/why…
English
1
0
4
787
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@mattyglesias Exactly one data point justifies the relationship continuing to hold as you move from Scandinavian income levels to those of the US. And it’s the US. This is just circular reasoning.
English
0
0
3
339
Simon
Simon@HoustonHizzoner·
@grok @mattyglesias @JamesCostopoul1 @grok reassess which states are the most gerrymandered in terms of deviation from partisan fairness, but using only raw actual numbers — no MSU Partisan Advantage Tracker, no efficiency gap, no seats-votes curves, and no complex models or simulations.
English
3
0
5
3.5K
Matthew Yglesias
Matthew Yglesias@mattyglesias·
It is EXTREMELY bad that Republicans repeatedly blocked a national ban on gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is bad, and Republicans are profoundly blameworthy for its continued existence.
YA@YesternightPost

@constans It makes no sense how all the liberal influencers can’t even say that gerrymandering is bad anymore. Not even @mattyglesias is calling it bad. Nakedly partisan.

English
174
363
4K
280.9K
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@golgfrombism @mattyglesias If your posterior probability distribution for “high point estimate, high variance” is “definitely zero because the arbitrary significance threshold told me so”…
English
0
0
0
123
The Gay of Whore Muse
The Gay of Whore Muse@golgfrombism·
@mattyglesias Buddy I once saw you ask Hakeem Jefferson a question that made it clear you thought a an OLS variable that was large but also insignificant meant something.
English
4
0
1
5.1K
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@_Jason_Dean_ @mattyglesias Redefining monopoly to mean "any really big company" severs the mechanism linking antitrust and consumer welfare; and systematically targeting big companies in highly contested markers, even if it's mostly just bluster, is a huge shift in practice.
English
0
0
2
156
Jason Dean
Jason Dean@_Jason_Dean_·
@mattyglesias I think you are incorrectly conflating a fringe academic debate with the actual real-world workings of antitrust regulators The cases that Lina Khan's FTC brought were still focused on prices, output, and restraints of trade (mainstream antitrust issues)
English
4
0
13
1.8K
Matthew Yglesias
Matthew Yglesias@mattyglesias·
I continue to find it puzzling that we've looped around to antitrust enforcement as an "affordability" strategy without revisiting the debate over the consumer welfare standard.
Edward-Isaac Dovere@IsaacDovere

NEW from me: Lina Khan's phone has been ringing w/prospective 2028 Dems, as she pushes for an even more aggressive anti-trust stance, adding tools from Trump. @ewarren: “If you’re a leader who wants to deliver on affordability, it’s a smart move to call" cnn.com/2026/04/20/pol…

English
26
38
539
91K
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@TheObscureLife @DoctorVive Has higher productivity translated into shorter work weeks (and higher real wages) without a vast program of redistribution? How’d that happen? Was it Bernie? Or markets?
English
0
0
0
8
GC
GC@TheObscureLife·
@pdbarnsley @DoctorVive The US has been a relatively flat line since 1980, that's 40 years. So when do you think we can expect that 20% drop to happen?
English
1
0
0
24
NicSD
NicSD@NicSD6·
@mattyglesias NYC was a mess in the 1970's because of soft on crime policies. Koch, etc. Guiliani, the modern left's anti-christ, fixed it.
English
6
1
42
1.7K
Bananaboat467
Bananaboat467@bananaboat41434·
@mattyglesias When AIPAC is singled out at a time where the government of Qatar, China and various other countries are buying influence via university donations, and media orgs, I think he has a point on the assault on the Jewish identity
English
7
1
7
1.1K
Progressive overload
Progressive overload@pdbarnsley·
@NateSilver538 The hilarious part is the big sudden increase right at the start when a bunch of people had to start pretending we had always been at war with Eastasia and that's good, actually.
English
0
0
5
1.1K
Nate Silver
Nate Silver@NateSilver538·
We're used to Trump-related polling movement being very glacial, but the war with Iran is *rapidly* getting more unpopular.
Nate Silver tweet media
English
127
642
3.8K
481.3K

Keşfet

@extramsg @mattyglesias @SashaGusevPosts @eslo_dev @AlexanderTurok @MakeUSAVAT @elonmusk @BarackObama