Both parent and grandparent are correct. Sovereign currency issuers can give away newly-printed money and tax receipts (other people's money). But if they give away too much "new" money too often, the result is to decrease the purchasing power of everyone else's money, so this too is taking away "other people's" money. One example is in American higher education: it has been shown that when federal tuition assistance increases, colleges raise tuition. So if you get the maximum federal aid possible, you still pay about the same as pre-aid programs, and if you don't, you're paying more than before. My alma mater does not turn out students twice as smart as a decade ago, though tuition has doubled over that timeframe.

There are at least two categories of midwives in the US. There are home-birth midwives, and registered nurse midwives. The latter have just about every power that an Ob-Gyn has, with the exception of surgery and maybe a few other things. And the benefit to delivering at a hospital with a RN midwife is that they are experienced in normal births and how those are supposed to progress, the range of variations possible, and methods for encouraging the birth process without jumping straight to drugs and knives.

By contrast, many OBs are highly experienced in all the possible situations where major complications arise, and are more comfortable in those settings than a natural but slow labor process. At least some OBs are more comfortable delivering via C-section because its duration is better controlled than natural labor. (Some allege that the increased cost of a C-section, and the ability to make one's tee time or opera concert also play a role in OBs encouraging or pressuring for pitocin, epidurals, and major abdominal surgery.)

Bottom line: UK-level midwives do exist in the US too, and I can recommend some fantastic ones in Silicon Valley if you're reading this and looking for one.

I think there is room for us to disagree about the interpretation of what GP said. Based on the SJMN article, I think GP is saying it should rise by $7k per annum, over a period of time. I've added the link to the SJMN article for your information, and note that today Matt Drudge linked to it on his home page: http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_24248486/obamacares-winners-and-losers-bay-area

So is how much I paid for my house and where I live, my voting registration, every federal license I've been granted and a variety of other things. But I don't want this all over the Internet accessible to everyone; the professional Big Data corporations are scary enough without having every Tom, Dick, and Harry being able to find out exactly where I live right after I pay for lunch with my credit card, and deciding to raid my house while I'm back at work. Or other crazy-but-plausible hypotheticals.

Sorry to be a math stickler, but a $7k increase for a family of four is $145.83 per person per month, and looking at it per person is not realistic with a family, as it is likely a $583-per-month change for a single wage earner.

The San Jose (California) Mercury News's top headline today was "Health law's reality sets in," and quotes a 60-year-old retired teacher whose individual annual insurance rate is rising by $1800. She says tellingly, "Of course, I want people to have health care. I just didn't realize I would be the one who was going to pay for it personally." (emphasis mine) Another 52-year-old self-employed engineer's coverage for a family of four will rise by $10,000, and he says, "I really don't like the Republican tactics, but at least now I can understand why they are so pissed about this. When you take $10,000 out of my family's pocket each year, that's otherwise disposable income or retirement savings that will not be going into our local economy."

Brought Arlo Guthrie to mind:

You know, if one person, just one person does it, they may think he's really sick and they won't take him.
And if two people, two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them.
And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in singing a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out.
They may think it's an organization.
And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day, I said fifty people a day walking in, singing a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out.
And friends they may think it's a movement.

You make some very good points. And if college is measured solely as a step to professional careers and higher wages, then these three did not do well. By that measure too, many majors of study should be disbanded or moved to community colleges because their likely ROI is negative. Another /. story covered the dearth of jobs available for newly-minted Physics Ph.D.s. And if you measure education primarily on its financial ROI, I'd argue that high school curriculum needs revamping: more home economics and less world history, more budgeting and less Advanced Algebra, more wood shop and less drama.

Things have changed a lot, for a variety of reasons, and I don't know all of why, though part of it had to do with our manufacturing strength following the destruction of other countries in WWII, and those countries' recoveries.

I do think that social mobility will decrease, not increase, if we tell students at Ball High and others, "You started here -- there is no point in going to college -- by virtue of living on Galveston Island, your future in low-wage jobs has been pre-written for you." Is college a losing proposition? So then is starting a business -- 8 of 10 fail in the first couple years. The odds are stacked against us in so many ways, it's a wonder we don't all off ourselves one morning. Thank you for some thoughts on what makes the system work better, and I hope that we can help steer the country in some of those directions.

I see brighter lights of hope than the reporter does. Student 1 hit a bad spot, yes, and the article's details of how that happened are heart-rending. But Student 2 is on track to graduate in 5 years, even after skipping and failing some classes. She's sticking with it. Heck, in some State Universities you have to plan on 5+ years to graduate even without skipping or failing, due to availability of some classes. $44k debt? I've seen double that for undergraduate alone. She's a winner in my eyes. Student 3 never aimed for a 4-year degree, but got the degree she sought. Would love for her to aim high, but we should give her credit for moving a step up even while caring about family.

So the reporter scores these 3 as a big fat zero, while I score them as 50% successful.

The money situation is tough. Since our laws fine you a fixed dollar amount for certain minor crimes (traffic violations for example), it's become a calculus for well-off folks about whether they want to obey the law or not. Carpool lanes give high-earners the chance to drive faster than all the rest of us: they can have a chauffeur, or buy an electric vehicle with special carpool stickers, or take the route of one scofflaw who wrote publicly in the local newspaper that the time he saved by cheating in the carpool lane made the occasional traffic ticket well worth it; he asked if he could purchase a lifetime pass!

Money can create such a divide between classes, letting the well-off get ahead faster while the poor are stuck in traffic and therefore unable to make the leaps and bounds to free themselves. I still hold each person responsible to do their best to improve their situation and think that a nation of victims is no nation at all, but I see the struggles of folks being snowballed by debts upon debts, where a couple dumb or unfortunate choices have ruined their future.

It makes me wonder how I can help to improve the stability and the opportunities for others. Getting a couple bills paid for someone in need could give them that lift to catch up on other things, and pull out of the pit. As long as they have that motivation, we should be seeking to give them the first step or two up.

Good book. Promoted it in an above comment before seeing you mention it. My head still spins at the NYTimes article I read a few months back of the guy living in New York City and complaining that $250,000 is only lower middle class. The things I could do with his money. Oy!

Despite your trollishness, I'll pipe in to plug the book, "The Millionaire Next Door." So you don't have to RTFB, here's the key point: people who live below their means can save money. Oodles of it, in some cases. And their neighbors don't have a clue because there are no fancy cars in the driveway, and no bragging about expensive vacations. To some people, the definition of rich is "being able to pay for everything I need and then some," which becomes much easier to achieve when you downsize your list of needs. For most folks, an iPhone with a data plan is not a need; neither is cable TV or regular movie-going or season tickets to XYZ. These are all wants, and perfectly justifiable if they fit within your finances, but there are alternate ways to achieve the ultimate pleasures that they offer. Sounds like killkillkill is going down that path, and is happy with his direction in life. (If his wife is on board and happy with it, he'll definitely be happy with it.) I do sincerely without sarcasm hope that whatever path you're choosing is fulfilling as well, and that if your path is not fulfilling, that you have opportunities to reorient. I'm in the process of trying to reorient myself, and it looks like work, but looks worthwhile too.

2% average annual inflation is a wonderful idea. But the Bureau of Labor Statistics says that never in my lifetime has college tuition risen by that little in one year. Every year it was between 3.98% and 13.44%. From the day I was born to the day I entered college, tuition rose 480%. By that math, today's $9K/year would become $52K/year, wiping out the savings in one year flat.

The text to speech device sounds cool; the reciprocal speech-to-text device is less reliable. Presuming the boss wants a response beyond a mere "ok", the driver has to engage in texting communications. As for pulling over, most commercial trucks have GPS and other tracking that identify what the vehicle is doing every minute. Fleet managers use this to monitor speed, for one, and ensure a driver isn't taking breaks and then speeding to make up for lost time. So they could know he's pulled over and get all irate about it if they chose.

I think it smacks of micromanaging, and putting people at risk for efficiency's sake, but people tend to do things I don't care for.

What APRs are you looking at? A 30-year fixed with 5% APR is about 50% principal, 50% interest over 30 years. Current mortgage rates are 4.5%. Granted, in the 1980s, 15% interest rates were more common, but these are different times.

Yup, that's exactly the point of the article which you read.

If I don't have proof whether you're responsible with money, but I do know that you are currently active friends with a deadbeat, your family members are likely highly supportive of you declaring bankruptcy, and your social circle has disproportionally high foreclosure levels, you look like a risk. Short of monitoring your conversations to ensure that you're not discussing anything financial with them, I have to assume that you rub off on them, and they rub off on you. And even if I know good things about you, which rubs off on them positively, this still takes you down a notch, because if you fall on hard times, you don't seem to have a network that will push to help you make your payments, unlike the guy whose friends and family all have stellar credit histories.

That's always the pain of statistical models: someone's an exception. But lenders aren't venture capitalists; nobody's going to pay them back 10x their investment. So they minimize risk. The bank insists on 20% down for the best mortgage rates; the payday lender charges you $45 upfront for the $300 loan. In the absence of personal relationships that establish information and trust, everybody tries to protect their bottom line. Makes sense to me.