LyrArc Article Gist
The coronavirus pandemic and the disaster in nursing homes, the chaotic conditions in the first wave, the lack of staff and poor attention to residents during the pandemic, has exposed the major weakness of nursing home care in western countries. Much of this sector is in the hands of private operators seeking a profit.  The staff is paid low wages and lacks the experience and empathy needed for care of older people. During a virus all these factors turn deadly. With some staff sick the other staff is overburdened. If the sick turn up for work they are likely to risk the safety of other staff and the residents. With the incubation period lack of testing there is no way to know. When deaths occur and the nursing homes are sealed from the outside world the deaths happen with no goodbyes as happened in U.S., Britain and Sweden. This has exposed the scandalous and shocking way in which the elderly are treated in today's environment where ridiculous amounts of money are being spent on other things and the the most basic "one's parents" are neglected and allowed to die in horrific manner in a pandemic. The new trend for home care for the elderly is a welcome trend and long overdue as one of the worst aspects of the system in the west is the treatment of elderly parents in nursing homes run for profit. The new technology tools available for monitoring a elderly person at home, and the help of stores such as Best Buy which are serving elderly at home, is making this more and more a choice for the elderly. Even older patients and ones needing significant care can recover and spend time at home in a better environment, a less costly one, as hospital managers and families have learned in 2020. Some hospitals in the U.S. say they never want to go back. That the drive to get every patient home who can be home is the right one for patients and families and for the government paying for the care so that dollars are well spent in quality of care. Home health care companies are working on providing new services for sicker patients recovering at home. Technology helps do better monitoring. Medicare now pays for digital doctor visits and intense hospital type care at home after coronavirus showed this as vitally needed.  Both the Biden and Trump administrations are firmly focused on this issue. Seema Verma as head of Medicare is clear about the need for a national conversation on how we take care of the elderly, of our parents. And Mr. Biden wants to spend $450 billon to make certain that people who need long term care can get the support they need in the home and the community. This report looks at the home health care companies and how they are improving their services. This and telemedicine are two of the major constructive changes coming out of the pandemic, clearing out some of the worst aspects of the old system of living the older years in the western world.  Nothing speaks more about humanity and a human world than the story here of Savanna Hollar, 90 years old and almost blind. She broke her shoulder in August, Her sons decided not to send her to a the rehab facility she went to after a broken hip 3 years earlier. The sons brought her home to recover in the farmhouse near Yadkinville, N.C., where she has lived since 1951. One of her sons himself 63 years says that at a nursing home she would be lonely, scared and afraid to move. The sons hired two people to help her during the day and a rotating system was used for having people help her. At home Mrs. Hollar could enjoy her gray cat, Buddy, her favorite recliner and tomato sandwiches made with produce from her garden. Really, if we can't do this much what good is the U.S.A.? or Britain? or Sweden? or India? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump's statement calling for a list of goods for tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods leaves China without a clear response and facing new risks. The U.S. exports about $150 billion in goods to China so that China would have to impose penalties to respond at the same level. Placing restrictions on American firms on access to China's market, and imposing other penalties would have the effect of reinforcing the perception of unfair practices targeting American business and lead to hardening of U.S. response.  The U.S. sees itself as being in a better position with the U.S. economy experiencing a growth trend. China with large local government and bank debt faces a difficult situation. President Jinping's policy of reducing the risks of bad debt in the banking system involved sacrificing some growth to stabilize the system. China's GDP growth in 2017 was 6.9%, the target at 6.5%. Future targets and actual growth now look to be much lower.The trade war with the U.S. has the effect of dampening growth leading to calls for the central bank to loosen its monetary stance. In response to Trump's announcement the People's Bank of China pumped $31 billion into the nation's banks. China is studying Japan's response in the 1980's and 1990's when the U.S. took strong action against Japan's growing trade surplus. Japan responded by appreciating its currency and using stimulus to cushion the effect of lower exports on the economy. The stimulus led to the housing bubble and over time a period of low growth and stagnant economy. The large China stimulus in 2008-2009 has compounded the problems in the banking system. Not deleveraging and controlling financial risks in China's banking system because of the trade war would bring a new set of risks. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Dan Balz says former prime minister Blair's policies in Britain (1997-2007) closely followed the policies of moving to centrist positions of U.S. president Clinton, with Blair's election in 1997 following Clinton's wins in 1992 and 1996. Clinton followed the Reagan years and Blair the Thatcher years in government, in modifying the early postwar ideas about the economy. The election of Corbyn by 59.5% of the vote of Labor party members, exceeds the 57% achieved by Blair in 1994. The opposing candidates did very poorly. Yvette Cooper, who most resembled Blair's positions was seen as waffling on issues by not taking clear positions. She lost badly with 4.5% of the vote, showing that something significantly has changed with the the deep recession following the 2008 financial crisis, and the recovery through years of austerity policies under Cameron's Conservative government. Balz's view is that this is likely to bring up the same debate in the Democratic party- Corbyn proposes a national investment bank for large investments in education, health services and infrastructure, and a reversal of Labor policies introducing fees for college education to increase opportunity. Sanders has not proposed a national investment bank, but says he would invest in education ( including reversing the spiralling education costs), health services, infrastructure, and other areas. Hillary Clinton has made the issue of upward mobility for the middle and working class a central issue in her campaign, but lacks the authenticity claimed by Sanders, who has tapped into anti-establishment feeling following the lack of recovery in wages under 7 years of the Democratic party government in the U.S. In this context Jeb Bush has also stated at the 2013 CPAC conference that social and economic mobility is the central issue of our times, only he would approach it by giving business incentives to increase business investment to create jobs and increase wages; and by adopting a tax code that would be also fair to the middle and working class....

LyrArc Article Gist
Van Dam says its not that great being a worker in the U.S. because it is hard for the unemployed resulting from competing with workers in other countries with lower wages, and for those who are unemployed harder because worker collective bargaining is weakened over 3 decades. He cites a 296 page OECD report showing very little government support for unemployed and at risk American workers. It says this has contributed to higher income inequality and larger share of lower income people than almost any other advanced a nation. Only Spain and Greece are shown as having more households earning less than half the median income- showing large numbers of people are poor or close to being poor. In the U.S. an average of 1 in 5 lose their jobs each year, and 23% of workers 15 to 64 are in their job less than a year in 2016. The job churn hurts workers because of firing and layoffs being frequent, more than is healthy for a economy. The U.S. and Mexico are the only two countries not requiring advance notice before firings. And fewer than half of workers find a job within a year in the U.S. Two in three families with a displaced worker fall in poverty for some time. Unemployed workers with typically 26 weeks support get less support than any other country in the study. Only 12% of workers in U.S. are covered by collective bargaining. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Porter of the NYT points out that the figures released from census information that the U.S. median household income increased by 5.2% in 2015 to $56,500 is good news for Americans including minority and working class families at the lower tiers. However more needs to happen compared to previous recoveries in the mid-90's, and for people who suffered during the recession to finally put that experience behind them, says Porter.