Real Case-Shiller House Price Index

Looking at housing prices in "real" inflation adjusted terms gives a better picture of the situation.

clipped from calculatedrisk.blogspot.com Looking at the Case-Shiller house price indices in real (inflation adjusted) terms give us an idea of how much further house prices might fall. . This graph shows the inflation adjusted Case-Shiller indices for San Diego, Chicago and the composite indices for 10 and 20 cities. (I'd add more cities, but the graph is too messy!) Looking at this graph, I'd guess prices have fallen somewhat less than half way (in real terms) to the eventual bottom. Of course, more inflation means less prices need to fall in nominal terms. Also look at the length of the housing bust in the early '90s. It took over six years from peak to trough in some cities. If this bust takes the same amount of time, prices will not bottom in some cities until 2012 (or there about).

Where is Iraq's oil money going?

clipped from www.cnn.com Two senators are asking congressional investigators to look at Iraq's oil revenues and see if the war-ravaged nation can pay for its own reconstruction, an effort that has been bankrolled to this point mostly by U.S. taxpayers. Government Accountability Office that Iraq has "tremendous resources" in banks worldwide but is doing little to improve security and reconstruction efforts. We believe that it has been overwhelmingly U.S. taxpayer money that has funded Iraq reconstruction over the last five years, despite Iraq earning billions of dollars in oil revenue Using numbers from the U.S. State Department and Iraqi Oil Ministry, the senators said Iraq hopes to produce 2.2 million barrels of oil a day this year. Weekly averages suggest that the number has climbed as high as 2.51 million barrels a day. That kind of oil production could earn Iraq a projected $56.4 billion this year we believe that Iraq will accrue at least $100.0 billion in oil revenues in 2007 and 2008

Employers Pick Workers’ Pockets on Health Insurance

That misunderstanding is called the “myth of shared responsibility” by Ezekiel Emanuel, the ethics guy, and Victor Fuchs, the money guy, in a commentary in JAMA. They explain that the cost of health insurance comes not from employers’ profits but from employee wages. Employers adjust for rising health care costs by essentially docking pay, and “the increasing cost of health care has resulted in relatively flat real wages for 30 years,” they write.

Employers Pick Workers’ Pockets on Health Insurance

To those of you who have health insurance through your job, a bioethicist and an economist pose this question: Who do you think pays for your health coverage?

Most people who get insurance at work believe that it’s the boss. But the notion that employers really pay for insurance for their employees simply isn’t true.

That misunderstanding is called the “myth of shared responsibility” by Ezekiel Emanuel, the ethics guy, and Victor Fuchs, the money guy, in a commentary in JAMA. They explain that the cost of health insurance comes not from employers’ profits but from employee wages. Employers adjust for rising health care costs by essentially docking pay, and “the increasing cost of health care has resulted in relatively flat real wages for 30 years,” they write.

Why does the myth matter? Emanuel says that people’s belief that they’re getting a free benefit is a big reason why they are resistant to a major overhaul of the health care system. But employer-based health care is economically inefficient, Emanuel tells the Health Blog. A substantial chunk of the money goes to pay for things that have nothing to do with health care, such as underwriting, sales and marketing.

Uwe Reinhardt, a Princeton health economist, likens the employer-based health insurance to a garden party where a very slick pickpocket steals your wallet and then buys you roses and chocolates. “You’d be very grateful,” Reinhardt tells the Health Blog. Employers “are pickpockets who very skillfully take it out of your paycheck. Then they say, ‘Now genuflect.’ ”

A system with a common, government-levied tax and a voucher-based private delivery system makes better economic sense, some economists believe. “It would be much clearer that as costs increase, people will ask more carefully, ‘Are we getting something that’s worth it?’ ” Emanuel says. If someone else is taking care of the restaurant check, “you don’t ask so clearly what is this costing. If, on the other hand, you’re paying the bill, you ask more critical questions.”

Alzheimer's Activities: Hundreds of Activities for Men and Women With Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders

Assisted living costs for Alzheimer's patient is tax deductible

clipped from www.usatoday.com Q: My mother just went into an assisted living facility due to Alzheimer's. It costs over $4500 per month. Are any portion of these expenses tax deductible? Answer from AICPA member Kenneth J. Strauss: Sorry about your mother but the good news is that the entire $4,500 is fully tax deductible as a medical expense. The rules can get pretty complicated but it is clear that Alzheimer's disease is a severe cognitive impairment which is the threshold for determining if the taxpayer is entitled to a full medical deduction. Like all medical deductions the total amount of medical deductions is an itemized deduction. The medical expenses in excess of 7.5% of her adjusted gross income are deductible. Depending on how high her income is will determine the full tax benefit. This might be a year to take some extra money from her retirement account. If your mother does not have the resources and you or another family member is paying then you should see if your mom can qualify as a dependent.