US Cardiovascular Diseases Rates are Improving But…

BUHealth, EC 581, EC 782

I browsed to the following overview of US research on Heart, Lung, and Blood diseases in the US. This report documents the dramatic improvements in cardiovascular health in the US, which they estimate costs the US about $300 billion or about $1000 per American in 2008 (Direct of treatment and indirect costs from premature mortality).  This makes the US look good, until they compare this trend to trends in other countries, which are almost all better, and have also had large decreases in mortality from 2000 to 2008. We currently spend $3 billion per year on research on Heart, Lung and Blood diseases ($10 per American per year). Below are three figures all from this one report.

http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/about/factbook/FactBook2011.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

1994 assault weapons ban may have saved 6000 lives per year

BUHealth, General Economics, Politics

Although not a statistical statement, there is a noticeable association between when the 1994-2004 assault weapon ban was in place and the observed decline in gun-related deaths. That ban also contained other provisions that will have affected availability of guns.

A decline of more than 6000 gun-related deaths per year appears to be  associated  with that legislation before it expired. See linked picture.

 

Another articles on this issue also has compelling graphs. The title of the paper could be its abstract..

S Chapman, P Alpers, K Agho, M Jones. 2006. Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm
deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings. Injury Prevention 2006;12:365–372. doi: 10.1136/ip.2006.013714

 

Two Great Articles in the December JEL

BU, BUHealth, General Economics

Journal of Economic Literature, December 2012

Two great articles.

Racial Discrimination in the Labor Market: Theory and Empirics

Kevin Lang and Jee-Yeon K. Lehmann

We review theories of race discrimination in the labor market. Taste-based models can generate wage and unemployment duration differentials when combined with either random or directed search even when strong prejudice is not widespread, but no existing model explains the unemployment rate differential. Models of statistical discrimination based on differential observability of productivity across races can explain the pattern and magnitudes of wage differentials but do not address employment and unemployment. At their current state of development, models of statistical discrimination based on rational stereotypes have little empirical content. It is plausible that models combining elements of the search models with statistical discrimination could fit the data. We suggest possible avenues to be pursued and comment briefly on the implication of existing theory for public policy. (JEL J15, J31, J64, J71)
Wonderful synthesis from Kevin and Lehmann, a recent BU Ph.D. alum.
Full-Text Access | Supplementary Materials 

Psychologists at the Gate: A Review of Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow

Andrei Shleifer
The publication of Daniel Kahneman's book, Thinking, Fast and Slow, is a major intellectual event. The book summarizes, but also integrates, the research that Kahneman has done over the past forty years, beginning with his path-breaking work with the late Amos Tversky. The broad theme of this research is that human beings are intuitive thinkers and that human intuition is imperfect, with the result that judgments and choices often deviate substantially from the predictions of normative statistical and economic models. In this review, I discuss some broad ideas and themes of the book, describe some economic applications, and suggest future directions for research that the book points to, especially in decision theory. (JEL A12, D03, D80, D87) 

Nice short summary of key themes from the extraordinary Kahneman book.

Full-Text Access | Supplementary Materials

#2 Include Social Security and Medicare taxes when discussing tax burdens

General Economics, Politics, Taxes, ,

Time to Change the Tax Discussion #2

This is the second in a five part series on Taxes.

Far too much of the discussion of tax burdens has focused on the federal income tax rates while the federal payroll taxes - Social Security and the Medicare tax - get minor attention. This was epitomized by Mitt Romney's reference to 47 percent of Americans as not paying any taxes, when what he meant was not paying any Federal income taxes. This line of discussion ignores the fact that low income earners pay Social Security and Medicare taxes. Almost every economist would agree that these payroll taxes affect net pay and incentives in fundamentally the same way as income taxes and hence matter greatly. While true that these are earmarked taxes, they are nonetheless important contributions to federal revenue and affect deficits. In 2012 The federal income tax contributed 32 percent of total federal revenue, while social security and medicare payroll taxes contributed 23.9 percent.  Since these social insurance taxes are either proportional (Medicare tax) or regressive (SSI, since it stops after $110,000 in 2012), they substantially change the overall progressivity of the taxes. the following figure is from the Concord Coalition, based on US Treasury data.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/oimg?key=0AqDf7XX8MI2BcGVxYmhHME92YWgtTXQ1bm84YTlpZkE&oid=2&zx=n74qil40ph5k

U.S. Treasury Department, Final Monthly Treasury Statement from Sept. 2012

http://www.concordcoalition.org/learn/budget/federal-budget-pie-charts

In an earlier blog (What are current marginal tax rates?), I calculated marginal tax rates for various levels of taxable income, which show that currently people earning $70,700 to $142,700 pay the highest marginal tax rates (38.1% including federal, SSI and Medicare taxes, higher if you add in Massachusetts income taxes).Warren Buffett basically referred to this same phenomenon when he said that his secretary paid higher taxes than he does on earned income.

Allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire will return those earning over $388,350 to paying the highest marginal rates (43.4% including the Medicare and ACA taxes).

For related discussion see the earlier blogs

#1 All Taxes and Budgets Should be Expressed as Dollars per Person

#2. Include Social Security and Medicare taxes when discussing tax burdens

 

All Taxes and Budgets Should be Expressed as Dollars per Person

General Economics, Politics, Taxes, , ,

Time to change the discussion #1

This is the first of five posts on my blog on how discussion of taxes and budgets in the US needs to change to improve decision-making.

Recent political debate and the media throws around costs of millions, billions and trillions of dollars even though there is no easy way for an ordinary citizen to evaluate the meaning of these terms. All of these are very big numbers. Consider the following numbers, sorted from largest to smallest. Which ones should we be worrying about?

Sample of recent numbers in the news (or that should be there)

$16.4 trillion US National Debt [1]

$3.7 trillion Total cost of wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan [Reuters,2]

$1.2 trillion Size of tax increases and budget cuts in the fiscal cliff [3]

$1.1 trillion Federal deficit for 2012 [4]

$849 billion What is at stake in the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy, those earning more than $250,000, over ten years. [ABC news,5]

$ 807 billion The US government’s estimate of the direct cost of the war in Iraq thru FY2012. [6]

$ 571 billion The US government’s estimate of the direct cost of the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan thru FY2012 [6]

$ 100 billion Cost of the Iraq war that was used in discussions just before attacking Iraq [7]

$ 1.4 billion Financial spending for all presidential candidates, 2011-2012. [8]

$ 446 million The FY2013 annual budget for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. [9]

$192 million The cost of the 2010 Newton North High School serving half of the Newton MA population [10]

$  83 million Campaigning expenses, all candidates including outside spending, on Elizabeth Warren vs. Scott Brown Massachusetts Senate race, 2012. [11]

$ 11 million Proposed tax override for Newton MA in 2013 to pay for schools [12]

$ 54,000 Cost of running the March special election to vote on the Newton override. [13]

The relevant populations

US population: 315 million people

MA population:  6.6 million

Newton population:  86,000 (half served by Newton North High School, the other by Newton South High School.)

Costs revisited with Ellis commentary

 

$ 52,000                US National Debt per Person -    High, but can be reduced if we try hard.

$12,000                 Total cost of wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan per Person Not worthwhile to me, and 23% of our total US debt!

$ 3,800                  Per person size of the 2013 fiscal cliff, in taxes and reduced spending.

$ 3,500                  Extra cost per person per year to eliminate the federal deficit for 2012. Although similar to the preceding, note that this is for one year, while the above is over ten years… Even jumping over this cliff does not eliminate our deficit.

$ 2,700                  Ten-year cost per person of the Bush-era tax cut on those earning more than $250,000. A lot is at stake here, not small change.

$ 270 Average per year cost per person of Bush-era tax cut on >$250k Doesn't look like such a big number, and this is how much it reduces our per person annual deficit.

$13,500 Average per year cost per wealthy person (top 2%) of Bush-era tax cuts. Recall that the average income of this group is way higher than $250k

$ 2,600                  The official direct cost per person of the war in Iraq.  Why isn’t there more discussion of this?

$ 1,800                  Cost per person of the Afghanistan war. Maybe Afghan was worthwhile, but I doubt it.

$   317                    Initial cost per person of the Iraq war used in selling it to the public. How could we have been so wrong?

$       4                    Cost per person of the US presidential campaign. Maybe higher than I wish, but it is not going to break our budgets. Plus it is all voluntary, unlike the taxes.

$       1                    Cost per person of federal funding of public TV and radio. A small portion of their total budget. Why are we talking about this at all?

$4,500                   Cost per Newton resident of the Newton North High School. High, but I bet we more than made it back in increased property values. Even ignoring that more than half was funded by the state, if there are 4 people per household, then this is only 2.6% of median property value in Newton.

$    13                     Cost per Massachussetts resident of the 2012 Senate race. Seems reasonable expense for making big decisions. Plus it only happens every six years for each senate race, so only $2 per year per person.

$  128                     Cost per Newton resident per year of proposed tax override to help pay for schools. Definitely affordable.

$       .62                 Per person cost of running Newton’s March special election. Should not have even made the papers. Informed decision-making costs money.

Lessons

Big cost numbers are easier to understand when expressed as a cost per person.

Some big numbers don’t look very scary. Others look worse.

The numbers that get a lot of play in the media are not necessarily the right numbers.

Thought to Ponder: Why is it that almost no one in Newton is worried about having incurred a debt for one school in the amount of $4500 per resident, while citizens, and our Congress in particular, seems paralyzed to contemplate reducing our federal debt by a similar amount?

Citations

[1]  http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

[2] Reuter. 2012. Cost of war at least $3.7 trillion and counting.  http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/29/us-usa-war-idUSTRE75S25320110629 based on estimates from “Cost of War at http://costofwar.com/ which is sponsored by the National Priorities Project.

[5] http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fiscal-cliff-bush-tax-cuts-expire/story?id=17907791#.UMnzFXfgztE

[4] http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/pagedetails.action?packageId=BUDGET-2012-BUD

[5] http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fiscal-cliff-bush-tax-cuts-expire/story?id=17907791#.UMoiRnfgztE

[6] Congressional Research Service, 2011. The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf updated continually at “Cost of War at http://costofwar.com/.

[7] Tom Russert Interview with Vice-President Dick Cheney, “NBC News’ Meet the Press," Transcript for March 16, 2003.https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/bush/cheneymeetthepress.htm

[8] Center for Responsive Politics, 2012.Most Expensive Races 2012 Overview

http://www.opensecrets.org/overview/index.php and

[9] Corporation for Public Broadcasting. 2012 Fiscal Year 2013 Operating Budget. http://www.cpb.org/aboutcpb/financials/budget/

[10] Newton Tab. 2012. Newton North High School final cost $6M less than expected. http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/x1334618956/Newton-North-High-School-final-cost-6M-less-than-expected#ixzz2EwkW8uLrhttp://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/x1334618956/Newton-North-High-School-final-cost-6M-less-than-expected#axzz2EwkHptlI

[11] Center for Responsive Politics, 2012.Most Expensive Races 2012 Overview http://www.opensecrets.org/overview/topraces.php?cycle=2012&display=allcandsout

[12] http://www.newtonma.gov/gov/executive/override.asp

[13] Newton Tab, December 12, 2012. Table showing breakdown of the various costs of the special election in March, 2013 on the override.

HCC risk adjustment formulas for ACA Exchanges

BUHealth, EC 581, Politics
HHS announced the new risk adjustment formulas proposed for the ACA Health Insurance Exchanges on December 7, 2012.
Here is the citation and direct link.
Department of Health and Human Services. HHS Benefit and Payment Parameters for 2014, and Medical Loss Ratio. 2012 [Dec 7 2012]. Available from: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-12-07/pdf/2012-29184.pdf
Focus only on the first 33 pages for teh Risk adjustment system.
Summary:
This proposed regulations provides details on the risk adjustment formula that is proposed for the Federal and STate Health insurance exchanges. At its heart is an HCC model similar to the Medicare 100 condition HCC model. Innovations are that it has separate models for four metal levels (bronze, silver, gold, platinum), it uses a concurrent rather than prospective framework, it has separate models for infants, children and adults. It was estimated at RTI using Truven Health Analytics 2010 MarketScan® data, which we also have licensed at Boston University for research use. The rules are a painful 373 pages long. Focus on pages 1-33 for an overview of the RA approach.
Other NPRM (=Notice of Proposed Rule Making) for regulations of the ACA are the following.
EHB/AV (Essential Health Benefits/Actuarial Value) NPRM:
Summary: http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/2012/11/ehb11202012a.html
Citation: US National Archives and Records Administration. 2012. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 45. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Standards Related to Essential Health Benefits, Actuarial Value, and Accreditation; Proposed Rule. [Available at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=CMS-2012-0142-0001]

Discussion: The rule discusses accreditation of health plans in a federally-facilitated or state-federal partnership exchange. States that plans offered inside and outside of the exchange must offer a core package of benefits including the following: Ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services, prescription drugs, rehabilitative services, lab services, preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management, and pediatric services.

The rule also specifies options for each state's "benchmark" plan. Plans must offer coverage greater than or equal to that offered by the benchmark plan.

The rule also specifies that HHS will provide an AV calculator to help issuers determine health plan ACs. The calculator uses a nationally representative sample. Starting in 2015, HHS will accept state-specific datasets to use with the calculator. The rule proposes a 2% AV window around the AV specified by for each metal group.

Market Reform NPRM:
Rule: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=CMS-2012-0141-0001
 

Citation: US National Archives and Records Administration. 2012. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 45. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Health Insurance Market Rules; Rate Review; Proposed Rule. [Available at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=CMS-2012-0141-0001]

Discussion: This rule focuses on reforms to the health insurance market. It includes guaranteed issue, premium regulation (rate bands, rate restrictions), single statewide risk pool, etc. The rule also proposes regulation changes to streamline data collection.

MPFS (Medicare Physician Fee Schedule) Rule:
Citation: US National Archives and Records Administration. 2012. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 42. Medicare Program; Revisions to Payment Policies Under the Physician Fee Schedule, DME Face-to-Face Encounters, Elimination of the Requirement for Termination of Non- Random Prepayment Complex Medical Review and Other Revisions to Part B for CY 2013. [Available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-11-16/pdf/2012-26900.pdf]
More rules and regulations are presented here.
I thank without implicating Tim Layton (BU RA extraordinaire) for organizing this information for me.

BU ranked 17th in world, 7th in US by “Most employable students”

BU, General Economics, Jobs

Graduates from Boston University were  ranked 17th most employable in the world and 7th most employable in the US by the 2012 Global Employability Survey, published by the New York Times and International Herald Tribune. It was discussed in BU Today on November 1, 2012. Here is the results in table form from the NY Times.

This represents a huge improvement from their ranking 51st in the US by the same newspaper in 2011.  Is this big change believable, and why the big change? The biggest factor is that for the 2011 study, (http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/10/20/education/20iht-SReducEmploy20-graphic.html?ref=education) the NYT Survey polled only business executives and board chairs, and only surveyed them from the ten countries, while for the 2012 the international survey included 20 countries from all over the world, including Asia and Latin America. The new survey also explicitly included 1200 top business recruiters as well as 1500 chief executives and business managers, as in the past.

It makes a big difference whether you ask recruiters as well as than chief executives, since recruiters will care more about a very large number of potential candidates before they visit or give attention to candidates from a particular university.  Plus this new survey included Australian and Asian countries for the first time.

Boston University is not only one of the largest (28,000+) private universities but has also had a large number of international, and particularly, Asian students and alumni, for decades. It also has a rich set of graduate degrees with high proportions international.

The following table was generated from the US News and World reports using the 50 universities with the highest % international undergraduate students. It shows that Boston University had the ninth highest number of international students among all these universities. Moreover some of the other surprises also have much higher numbers than the ivies and other top schools. Hence these ratings from recruiters make sense, once one takes this into account.

Ranking of 50 Universities  with high international student percentages by number of international students.

Source: http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/most-international/spp+50
Columns
A = ranking by largest number of international undergraduate students
B = University name
C = % internat.
D = # of Undergrads
E = Number of Internat. students
F = rank by # % Internat

Source: http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/most-international/spp+50
A B C D E F
% internat. Undergrads Internat. students Rank by  % Internat
1 Purdue University--West Lafayette 15% 30,776 4616.4 8
2 University of Illinois--Urbana-Champaign 13% 32,256 4193.28 12
3 Michigan State University 9% 36,675 3300.75 36
4 University at Buffalo--SUNY 16% 19,334 3093.44 7
5 Indiana University--Bloomington 9% 32,543 2928.87 39
6 University of Minnesota--Twin Cities 8% 34,812 2784.96 50
7 University of California--Berkeley 9% 25,885 2329.65 35
8 New York University 10% 22,280 2228 29
9 Boston University 12% 18,140 2176.8 16
10 University of Southern California 12% 17,414 2089.68 15
11 University of California--San Diego 9% 23,046 2074.14 33
12 New School 27% 7,081 1911.87 1
13 Northeastern University 14% 12,913 1807.82 9
14 University of Iowa 8% 21,564 1725.12 48
15 University of Oregon 8% 20,623 1649.84 43
16 Cornell University 9% 14,167 1275.03 38
17 Stony Brook University--SUNY 8% 15,926 1274.08 44
18 Drexel University 10% 11,899 1189.9 31
19 Binghamton University--SUNY 10% 11,861 1186.1 28
20 Syracuse University 8% 14,671 1173.68 46
21 University of Miami 11% 10,509 1155.99 21
22 University of Pennsylvania 11% 9,779 1075.69 20
23 Carnegie Mellon University 17% 6,281 1067.77 6
24 University of Colorado--Denver 8% 12,674 1013.92 45
25 Emory University 11% 7,441 818.51 22
26 University of San Francisco 13% 6,051 786.63 10
27 Harvard University 11% 6,657 732.27 23
28 Florida Institute of Technology 26% 2,724 708.24 2
29 Brown University 11% 6,380 701.8 25
30 St. Louis University 8% 8,670 693.6 42
31 Columbia University 11% 6,027 662.97 19
32 University of Rochester 11% 5,643 620.73 18
33 Georgetown University 8% 7,590 607.2 47
34 Princeton University 11% 5,249 577.39 26
35 Illinois Institute of Technology 21% 2,714 569.94 3
36 University of Tulsa 18% 3,004 540.72 5
37 Johns Hopkins University 9% 5,980 538.2 37
38 Yale University 10% 5,349 534.9 27
39 Duke University 8% 6,680 534.4 49
40 University of Chicago 9% 5,388 484.92 34
41 Massachusetts Institute of Technology 10% 4,384 438.4 30
42 University of Denver 8% 5,453 436.24 41
43 Worcester Polytechnic Institute 11% 3,849 423.39 17
44 Brandeis University 12% 3,504 420.48 14
45 Rice University 10% 3,755 375.5 32
46 Lynn University 18% 1,619 291.42 4
47 Andrews University 13% 1,929 250.77 11
48 Polytechnic Institute of New York University 11% 1,939 213.29 24
49 Clark University 9% 2,311 207.99 40
50 California Institute of Technology 12% 978 117.36 13

The big jump in the ranking of Boston University's rating by international recruiters into the "seventh most employable students" from last years ranking of 51 by mostly US business executives is probably mostly real.

US Affordable Care Act and Risk Adjustment

BUHealth, Politics

Although there is no accompanying paper, I thought it might be useful to post the PowerPoint slides that I have used in several recent talks about the US since there is an enormous interest in a relatively concise summary of the features of the ACA.

Since my area of particular interest is risk adjustment, there are a number of slides on that topic.

Since Massachusetts is an important early demonstration, I included three slides on Massachusetts.

There are three versions posted: the PowerPoint slides, a pdf version, and a pdf version as a handout (four slides per page).

Powerpoint pdf Handout

 

 

 

A SURVEY OF AMERICA’S PHYSICIANS: PRACTICE PATTERNS AND PERSPECTIVES

BUHealth

An Examination of the Professional Morale, Practice Patterns, Career Plans, and Healthcare Perspectives of Today’s Physicians, Aggregated by Age, Gender, Primary Care/Specialists, and Practice Owners/Employees

Survey conducted on behalf of The Physicians Foundation by Merritt Hawkins | Completed September, 2012. Copyright 2012, The Physicians Foundation

I found this physician survey very useful for statistics about age, hours, patient visits per day, specialty, practice size, attitudes, health reform, ACOs, PCMH and more.

The results reflect selection bias and has an older set of respondents than all MDs, but is still interesting.

http://www.physiciansfoundation.org/uploads/default/Physicians_Foundation_2012_Biennial_Survey.pdf

What are current marginal income tax rates?

General Economics, Politics

A great deal of political discussion has focused on what taxes the wealthy and poor  pay, and often the focus is ONLY on the Federal Income tax. It is important to recognize that that there are many other taxes, and none are as progressive as the Federal income tax, and hence fall on low to middle income people. Below is a table I generated using federal income tax rates for 2012 and 2013, to which I have added the Social Security (both individual and employer share), Medicare taxes and the state income tax for Mass (which is essentially a fixed proportional after deductions). I did not try to include the alternative minimum tax, which has a 26%  marginal rate after a high deductible.

The bottom line is that in 2012 middle income households with taxable earned incomes of $70,700  to $142,700 pay higher marginal tax rates than the highest income earners, largely because the Social Security tax disappears above about $110,000.  If the Bush tax cuts revert to their 2002 levels, then both the Capital gains tax will increase and the marginal rate for the highest income group will exceed that of the middle income levels.

Marginal Tax Rates 2012 and 2013 for married, filing jointly, all earned income is from an employer
Tax rates for 2013 assume taxes revert to their 2002 levels, but tax intervals remain as they are in 2012
Federal tax rates Social Security tax* Medicare tax Mass. income tax totals, marginal income taxes rates in Massachusetts
Taxable income ranges for 2012, after deductions 2003-2012 2002 and 2013 2012 2013 2012 2013 2012 2013 2012 2013
$0 to $17,400 10% 15% 10.2% 12.2% 2.9% 2.9% 5.25% 5.25% 28.35% 35.35%
$17,400 to $70,700 15% 15% 10.2% 12.2% 2.9% 2.9% 5.25% 5.25% 33.35% 35.35%
$70,700 to $142,700 25% 28% 10.2% 12.2% 2.9% 2.9% 5.25% 5.25% 43.35% 48.35%
$142,700 to $217,450 28% 31% 2.9% 2.9% 5.25% 5.25% 36.15% 39.15%
$217,450 to $388,350 33% 36% 2.9% 3.8% 5.25% 5.25% 41.15% 45.05%
$388,350 and up 35% 39.6% 2.9% 3.8% 5.25% 5.25% 43.15% 48.65%
$250,000 of Schedule C income 35% 39.6% 5.25% 5.25% 40.25% 45%
Alternative minimum tax after ded. 26% 26% 10.2% 12.2% 2.9% 2.9% 5.25% 5.25% 44.35% 46.35%
Long term capital gains tax 15% 20% 5.25% 5.25% 20.25% 25%
* The maximum used for the social security tax is $110,000 in 2012: tax rates shown are for bottom range in bracket
Sources:
http://taxes.about.com/od/Federal-Income-Taxes/qt/Tax-Rates-For-The-2012-Tax-Year.htm
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/COLA/cbb.html#Series
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/taxRates.html
http://www.mass.gov/dor/docs/dor/forms/inctax12/f1-nrpypdfs/form-1.pdf
http://www.mass.gov/dor/docs/dor/forms/inctax12/f1-nrpypdfs/sch-d.pdf

US physician hours and visits still down 17% in 2012.

BUHealth
Edward Davies
BMJ 2012; 345 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e6863 (Published 10 October 2012)
 

Cite this as: BMJ 2012;345:e6863
"Between 2008 and 2012, the average number of hours physicians worked fell from 57 hours a week to 53, and doctors saw 16.6% fewer patients. The research, based on a survey of 13 575 physicians across the US, estimates that if these patterns continue 44 250 full time equivalent (FTE) physicians will be lost from the workforce in the next four years. 

More than half of physicians (52%) have limited the access of Medicare patients to their practices or are planning to do so, while one out of four physicians (26%) have already closed their practices altogether to Medicaid patients, the survey shows. Physicians cited rising operating costs, time constraints, and diminishing reimbursement as the primary reasons why they are unable to accept additional Medicare and Medicaid patients."

The survey was fielded online from late March to early June 2012 by Merritt Hawkins for the Physicians Foundation

 

What I Wish Obama Had Said

BUHealth, General Economics, Politics

Alternative Debate Speech Text that President Obama Could Have Used at the First Presidential Debate on October 3, 2012[i]

Randall P. Ellis

Boston University, Department of Economics

October 6, 2012

On Taxes

We have heard a lot of talk from the Republicans about the importance of lowering taxes on people earning more than $250,000 which the Republicans like to call the "job creators." Republicans especially like to link being wealthy with being a small business owners. But let me tell you something else. Small business owners for the most part reinvest their earnings back in their own company, and earn relatively modest incomes. IRS returns show that 97 percent of small business owners earn less than $250,000 per year[ii] , and hence will not be hurt by increasing individual income taxes on the wealthy. Let me repeat that: 97 percent of small business owners earn less than $250,000 per year. It is the overpaid senior executives of large businesses who largely earn more than $250,000, not the small business owners. The Republicans are eager to protect these big guys, the ones funding the Republican campaigns, with tax cuts that favor the wealthy. Less than two percent of all households earn more than $250,000 per year[iii], and they are doing just fine. I want to focus our tax reforms and government investments on helping the other 98 percent of households.

On Social Security

I am glad you asked about Social Security, which is working well: I have no plans to make any changes to this wildly popular program. All Americans earning a paycheck are required to contribute to support this program through a social security payroll tax, which is a type of income tax. The Social Security system provides income to elderly people when they retire, even if they have not been so clever, organized or motivated to save enough for their own retirement. Social Security is a social insurance program, since people who live longer take out more money than people who are less unfortunate and die while young. Social Security also redistributes money a little bit from people who earn more to people who earn less. For example a parent who works hard raising a family still gets some social security even if their spouse dies, or they are divorced, and even if the parent never receives a pay check. Despite it being social insurance and redistribution, Social Security is wildly popular. My republican opponents think social insurance is socialism, and even call it Socialist Security because it is a form of redistribution, which they have made out to be a political no-no to mention. But there it is, a wildly popular, income redistribution program that we should all embrace.

As all of you know who have watched the revealing secret video taken of Mitt Romney speaking to a select group of large donors, Governor Romney discounts this sizable income tax as being unimportant even though it represents more than 35 percent of our federal revenue.[iv] He considers the elderly retired, students working part time while earning a degree, and anyone earning less than about $15,000 for single head of households or about $30,000 for families as being dependents, not worthy of his concern, because they pay no income taxes.  I couldn’t disagree with him more. Social payroll taxes, paid by hardworking citizens generate more than four times the federal revenue as all corporate taxes.[v]

On reducing the national deficit:

I would like to respond to Governor Romney's correct statement that there are three ways of cutting the national debt: Raising taxes, cutting government expenses, and growing the economy. On the third one, growing the economy, every economist, every politician, and every citizen I have ever met will agree that the third one is the best of the three.  It is American apple pie. But it doesn't mean anything for Gov. Romney to claim that he will do a better job at growing the economy. In fact, if you look back over the last fifty years, the economy, jobs and the stock market have all grown faster under Democratic presidents than Republican ones. Go check out the facts.[vi] And this is especially true under the disastrous leadership of the previous Republican president, George W. Bush who caused the greatest recession in eighty years with his tax cuts and unfunded spending policies.

The only specific, substantive policies that Gov. Romney has proposed for promoting growth is to cut taxes, particularly on the wealthiest Americans. And that is the same policy that was tried and failed by George W. Bush and the Republicans who tied or had a majority in both Houses of Congress for six of the eight years that President Bush was in office[vii], notably at the time that Congress voted for two unfunded wars and the first of the two enormous Bush tax cuts.

Former president Bill Clinton said it well when he highlighted that republicans, not democrats have a worse record of increasing our national debt. Ronald Reagan nearly tripled the national debt under his presidency, while George W. Bush nearly doubled the national debt.[viii] President Clinton was the only president in the postwar period to hand his successor a budget surplus when he left office. Democrats, not Republicans, are more effective at cutting the national debt.

I am sad that because of the two unfunded wars, the Bush tax cuts, and increased spending necessitated by this Great Recession, the National Debt has also increased greatly during my term. It is not what I wanted. But a reasonable American will agree that I was handed an economy in such serious agony by my predecessor that it would have been irresponsible not to have continued and in many cases increased government spending and tax cuts so as to get us out of this recession.

As our economy improves, I promise to work hard toward implementing elements of the bipartisan recommendations of the 2010 Bowls-Simpson commission, which reflected a balanced reduction in spending together with selective increases in taxes.   In contrast to my willingness to support a balanced approach to deficit reduction that includes both tax increases and in spending reductions, Gov. Romney has stated that he will be unwilling to agree to a deficit reduction even if it involves less than $1 of tax increases for every $10 in spending reductions[ix]. That is not going to solve our budget deficit problem.

On ObamaCare

I thank the former Governor for giving me credit for creating the Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare, since a different candidate would perhaps take pride in something that he himself helped create in Massachusetts. Contrary to what he says, I worked hard to try to get Republican support for this health reform bill, using Romney’s own successful health reform approach from Massachusetts, and embracing concepts from the conservative Heritage Foundation and from Republicans who supported the idea of setting up private exchanges when President Clinton tried to do health reform. Unfortunately the Republicans in congress could no longer support their own approach once it was embraced by me and the Democrats, so we had to move forward without their voting support. It is dishonest to say that I did not try to reach across the aisle and try to get bipartisan support.

Even though some features of ObamaCare remain controversial, the features of ObamaCare that have already been implemented are enormously popular. Let me describe a few of its features that are already in place.

ObamaCare allows all young people to remain on their parent's health insurance policy up until age 26, which resulted in immediate coverage for over 2 million young people in 2010.[x] This feature is enormously popular.

ObamaCare prohibits health insurance plans from dropping coverage for anyone just because they became sick. This feature is enormously popular.

Obama prohibits health insurance plans from denying coverage to any family just because they have a child with a serious or expensive preexisting health condition. This feature is enormously popular.

ObamaCare helps reduce the donut hole gap in Medicare's prescription drug coverage, whereby Medicare enrollees have to pay 100 percent of their prescription drug costs once annual drug spending exceeds $2800.[xi] This reduces prescription drug costs by an average of $250 in 2012. This benefit is enormously popular among the elderly.

ObamaCare creates a reinsurance pool for uninsured retirees aged 55 to 64, which is very popular with this highly vulnerable group.

ObamaCare creates a high risk pool to help insurance companies be more willing to insure people with expensive preexisting conditions.[xii] Very few insurers have taken up this program, suggesting that insuring people with expensive preexisting conditions is less expensive than they sometimes lead us to believe.

ObamaCare forces insurance companies to give rebates to enrollees whenever claims costs are less than 80 or 85% of premium revenues. This very popular program has already forced plans to pay back more than a billion dollars to commercially insured enrollees in 2012. It is likely that even plans not paying rebates have been motivated to not raise premiums as much as they would of, and hence this is likely one reason why health insurance premiums have grown so slowly in the past two years.

So from my point of view, Obamacare is already proven to be highly popular among the Americans already benefiting, which includes most of our elderly, our young adults, people with sick children, and everyone at risk of high cost illnesses. You should ask yourself whether you think these changes I just mentioned are something you yourself support, and keep an open mind about your support for the changes yet to come in future years.

Closing remarks

We have heard a lot of new statements from Gov. Romney tonight, as he tries to “reboot” his image. But Americans should not be voting based on the marketing image that the Republican Party has chosen to broadcast in the final months of this long campaign. Instead they should base their voting on facts. The fact is that Gov. Romney has gone out of his way to align himself with a relatively extreme group of Republicans, exemplified by his choice of a vice presidential partner, that represents a radical change in how our society and government operates. Today’s Republican Party is not the party of Ronald Reagan, it is now the Republican Party of Negativity.

Today’s Republican Party of Negativity is assaulting women’s rights, trying to undo women’s access to birth control, right to humane treatment when raped, or right to equal pay.

Today’s Republican Party of Negativity is in denial that global warming is largely caused by the actions of humans and will have disastrous consequences if we don’t begin to take notice and do something about it.

Today’s Republican Party of Negativity is repeatedly voting to obstruct legislation in the Senate. The Senate leadership said this bluntly shortly after I was elected, and has proceeded to filibuster and delay legislation repeatedly. The democratic majority has had to invoke cloture, which is a vote to try to end a filibuster hundreds of times during my term, an intentional Republican strategy.

Today’s Republican Party of Negativity wastes its time voting 33 times to repeal  ObamaCare in the House even when it knows the legislation has no chance of making it through the Senate or being signed by me.

Today’s Republican Party of Negativity repeatedly asserts that ObamaCare reflects a government takeover of health care, while even any fool can look at Massachusetts reforms on which it is based and see that ObamaCare does precisely the opposite, building upon private health care provision, private insurance plans and individual consumer choice  of health plan options.

Today’s Republican Party of Negativity needlessly held our country hostage by refusing to raise the US debt ceiling, even after many of the same Republican senators  voted 17 times to raise the debt ceiling under Ronald Reagan, and voted seven times to raise the debt ceiling under George W Bush.

Today’s Republican Party of Negativity and new chief spokesman Governor Romney says that they care about everybody, but their own votes, their own private speeches, and the words of their corporate sponsors tell us the truth.

I urge you to vote for me, Barack Obama and for others in the Democratic party this November, and show today’s Republican Party of Negativity that theirs is not the direction that our country should go in.

God Bless America.

[i] http://www.youtube.com/politics?feature=etp-pv-ype-b54f6ff011

[iv] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ge03Sys8SdA, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBj0joyCeag&feature=relmfu

[v] http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/numbers/revenue.cfm

[viii] http://treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo4.htm

Lisa Iezzoni’s new book on Risk Adjustment****

BU, BUHealth, EC 581, EC 782

I just received and have scanned through Lisa Iezzoni's fourth book (as editor and major contributor) entitled

Risk Adjustment for Measuring Health Care Outcomes (Fourth Edition), Lisa I Iezzoni (ed) (2013)

Even though Lisa is a physician, not an economist or statistician, this book provides an excellent overview of risk adjustment (population-based), and severity or case mix adjustment (episode or event based), and includes discussion of available datasets, model comparisons, propensity score matching, lists of information potentially useful, clinical classification, variables  clinical, social and statistical issues. Contributions on statistical methodology by Michael Swartz and Arlene Ash, as well as separate chapters on mental health, long term care, managing healthcare organizations, and provider profiling are excellent. Its main weakness is in not capturing international developments at all, not discussing the commercial market for risk adjustment models, and not covering most nonlinear and econometric (as distinct from statistical) issues well. Still, it should be required reading for anyone planning to do work in this area.

I have put it on my list of all time favorite books, but acknowledge that only a limited subset of people will be interested in it.

 

Comprehensive Primary Care Initiative, by CMS, Overview

BUHealth, EC 581, EC 782

CMS posted in late August an interesting site that provides lots of information about the seven demonstrations going on for Comprehensive Primary Care Payment.

http://innovations.cms.gov/initiatives/Comprehensive-Primary-Care-Initiative/index.html
Each site includes a list of participating PCPs. with specific clinic names, zip codes and addresses. Could be interesting to examine how severe a selection problem there is.

Five Questions for Health Economists

BU, BUHealth, Conferences, EC 581, EC 782

My presidential address to the American Society of Health Economists is now available to download and scheduled for publication in the International Journal of Health Care Finance and Economics. Here is the link.

Five questions for health economists

Randall P. Ellis

Online First™, 3 September 2012

Here is the direct link to the pdf file.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/7m2668027362x52r/fulltext.pdf

 

Stirring but informative Clinton nomination speech for Barack Obama

BUHealth, Politics

I highly recommend to you the YouTube link to Bill Clinton's 49 minute Nominating Speech for Barack Obama.
Of particular use to health economists are his comments on the implications of the Romney-Ryan discussion of Medicare and Medicaid, I recommend that you watch the segment from 28:10 to 36:10.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeqNmaawCVw

Watch 28:10 to 36:10 to understand the health care discussion and why this issue is so important.
If you prefer text, you can read his speech as transcribed in the NYTimes.

The prepared text is linked here.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/05/bill-clinton-speech-text-_n_1850531.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2012

The health discussion text from the speech follows. Note that his actual speech deviated from the prepared text in a few key places. Hence I am using the transcript.

...

Now, that brings me to health care. (Cheers, applause.) And the Republicans call it, derisively, “Obamacare.” They say it’s a government takeover, a disaster, and that if we’ll just elect them, they’ll repeal it. Well, are they right?

AUDIENCE MEMBERS: No!

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Let’s take a look at what’s actually happened so far.

First, individuals and businesses have already gotten more than a billion dollars in refunds from insurance companies because the new law requires 80 (percent) to 85 percent of your premium to go to your health care, not profits or promotion. (Cheers, applause.) And the gains are even greater than that because a bunch of insurance companies have applied to lower their rates to comply with the requirement.

Second, more than 3 million young people between 19 and 25 are insured for the first time because their parents’ policies can cover them.

(Cheers, applause.)

Millions of seniors are receiving preventive care, all the way from breast cancer screenings to tests for heart problems and scores of other things. And younger people are getting them, too.

Fourth, soon the insurance companies — not the government, the insurance companies — will have millions of new customers, many of them middle-class people with pre-existing conditions who never could get insurance before. (Cheers, applause.)

Now, finally, listen to this. For the last two years — after going up at three times the rate of inflation for a decade, for the last two years health care costs have been under 4 percent in both years for the first time in 50 years. (Cheers, applause.)

So let me ask you something. Are we better off because President Obama fought for health care reform? (Cheers, applause.) You bet we are.

Now, there were two other attacks on the president in Tampa I think deserve an answer. First, both Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan attacked the president for allegedly robbing Medicare of $716 billion. That’s the same attack they leveled against the Congress in 2010, and they got a lot of votes on it. But it’s not true. (Applause.)

Look, here’s what really happened. You be the judge. Here’s what really happened. There were no cuts to benefits at all. None. What the president did was to save money by taking the recommendations of a commission of professionals to cut unwarranted subsidies to providers and insurance companies that were not making people healthier and were not necessary to get the providers to provide the service.

And instead of raiding Medicare, he used the savings to close the doughnut hole in the Medicare drug program — (cheers, applause) — and — you all got to listen carefully to this; this is really important — and to add eight years to the life of the Medicare trust fund so it is solvent till 2024. (Cheers, applause.)

So — (chuckles) — so President Obama and the Democrats didn’t weaken Medicare; they strengthened Medicare. Now, when Congressman Ryan looked into that TV camera and attacked President Obama’s Medicare savings as, quote, the biggest, coldest power play, I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry — (laughter) — because that $716 billion is exactly, to the dollar, the same amount of Medicare savings that he has in his own budget. (Cheers, applause.) You got to get one thing — it takes some brass to attack a guy for doing what you did. (Laughter, cheers, applause.)

So — (inaudible) — (sustained cheers, applause) — now, you’re having a good time, but this is getting serious, and I want you to listen.

(Laughter.) It’s important, because a lot of people believe this stuff.

Now, at least on this issue, on this one issue, Governor Romney has been consistent. (Laughter.) He attacked President Obama too, but he actually wants to repeal those savings and give the money back to the insurance company. (Laughter, boos.)

He wants to go back to the old system, which means we’ll reopen the doughnut hole and force seniors to pay more for drugs, and we’ll reduce the life of the Medicare trust fund by eight full years. (Boos.)

So if he’s elected, and if he does what he promised to do, Medicare will now grow (sic/go) broke in 2016. (Boos.) Think about that. That means, after all, we won’t have to wait until their voucher program kicks in 2023 — (laughter) — to see the end of Medicare as we know it. (Applause.) They’re going to do it to us sooner than we thought. (Applause.)

Now, folks, this is serious, because it gets worse. (Laughter.) And you won’t be laughing when I finish telling you this. They also want to block-grant Medicaid, and cut it by a third over the coming 10 years.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: No!

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Of course, that’s going to really hurt a lot of poor kids. But that’s not all. Lot of folks don’t know it, but nearly two-thirds of Medicaid is spent on nursing home care for Medicare seniors — (applause) — who are eligible for Medicaid.

(Cheers, applause.) It’s going to end Medicare as we know it. And a lot of that money is also spent to help people with disabilities, including — (cheers, applause) — a lot of middle-class families whose kids have Down’s syndrome or autism or other severe conditions. (Applause.) And honestly, let’s think about it, if that happens, I don’t know what those families are going to do.

So I know what I’m going to do. I’m going to do everything I can to see that it doesn’t happen. We can’t let it happen. (Cheers, applause.) We can’t. (Cheers, applause.)

 

Congrats to BU faculty on prominent role at ASSA 2013!

BU, BUHealth, Conferences, General Economics

Congratulations!

BU faculty, graduate students and alumni appear prominently in the program of the Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) meetings (aka the AEA meetings), scheduled to be held in San Diego January 4-6, 2013. Altogether their names appear as presenters, authors, chairs or discussants at least 73 times. Seventeen different economics faculty are listed as participants (up from 12 in 2012). I see many colleagues from SMG and SPH as well.

Names of BU faculty, graduate students and alumni on the preliminary program of the ASSA are shown on the extract below in Bold. (Also shown are the times and rooms in case you have not looked yet.) My apologies for the incompleteness of this listing, since finding alumni in particular is challenging. I am sure I missed many more alumni.

Well done colleagues!

The full ASSA preliminary program is listed here. http://www.aeaweb.org/aea/2013conference/program/preliminary.php

(Also, not too early to begin planning for your presentation at ASSA 2014, which will be in Philadelphia Jan 3-5, 2014, or for 2015 in Boston!)

Be sure to plan on attending the BU reception at the ASSA which will be
Saturday, January 5, 6:00-8:00 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt-Gregory A & B

Here is the full roster of BU participants/coauthors

Jan 04, 2013 8:00 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Molly A & B
American Economic Association
The Market for Medicines in Developing Countries (O1)
Drug Quality and the Development of Private Retail Pharmacy Markets
Wesley Yin (Boston University)
Dan Bennett (University of Chicago)

Jan 04, 2013 8:00 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Gibbons
Econometric Society
Product Markets (D4)
Durable Goods Monopoly with Stochastic Costs
Juan Matias Ortner (Princeton University)
Discussants:
Juan Matias Ortner (Princeton University)

Jan 04, 2013 8:00 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Elizabeth Ballroom A
American Economic Association
The Organizational Economics of Multinational Firms (F2)
Discussants:
Andrew Newman (Boston University)
Stefania Garetto (Boston University)

Jan 04, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Manchester D
American Economic Association
Finance (G1) (Poster Session)
Do Humans Perceive Temporal Order in Asset Returns?
Jasmina Hasanhodzic (Boston University)
Andrew Lo (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Emanuele Viola (Northeastern University)

Jan 04, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Gregory A & B
American Economic Association
Financial Intermediation and Financial Crisis (E5)
Presiding: Jianjun Miao (Boston University)
Banking Bubbles and Financial Crisis
Jianjun Miao (Boston University)
Pengfei Wang (Hong Kong University of Science and Technology)
Demand Creates its Own Supply
Christophe Chamley (Boston University)
Discussants:
Simon Gilchrist (Boston University)

Jan 04, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Edward A
American Economic Association
Global Production Chains (F1)
Do Prices Determine Vertical Integration? Evidence from Trade Policy
Laura Alfaro (Harvard Business School)
Paola Conconi (Universite Libre de Bruxelles)
Harald Hadinger (University of Vienna)
Andrew Newman (Boston University)

Jan 04, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Elizabeth Ballroom G
American Economic Association
Work on Women's Work is Never Done (J2)
Shocking Female Labor Supply: A Reassessment of the Impact of World War II on U.S. Women's Labor Supply
Claudia Goldin (Harvard University)
Claudia Olivetti (Boston University)

Jan 04, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Ford B
International Health Economics Association
Health Insurance Market Innovations (I1)
Presiding: Wesley Yin (Boston University and NBER)
Discussants:
Dara Lee (University of Missouri)

Jan 04, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Ford C
National Tax Association
Health Care Cost Containment (I1)
Age-Based Heterogeneity and Pricing Regulation on the Massachusetts Health Insurance Exchange
Keith Marzilli Ericson (Boston University and NBER)

Jan 04, 2013 2:30 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Elizabeth Ballroom C
American Economic Association
Markups, Customer Base and Business cycles (E2)
Presiding: Leena Rudanko (Boston University)
Inflation Dynamics during the Financial Crisis: Microeconomic Evidence on the Linkages between Price-Setting and Balance Sheet Conditions
Simon Gilchrist (Boston University)
Egon Zakrajsek (Federal Reserve Board)
Raphael Schoenle (Brandeis University)
Customer Capital and Business Cycles
Francois Gourio (Boston University)
Leena Rudanko (Boston University)
Discussants:
Christopher House (University of Michigan)

Jan 04, 2013 2:30 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Cunningham A & B
Econometric Society
Nature of Labor Income Risk (E2)
Reconciling Estimates of Income Processes in Growth Rates and Levels
Moira Daly (Copenhagen Business School)
Dmytro Hryshko (University of Alberta)
Iourii Manovskii (University of Pennsylvania)

Jan 04, 2013 2:30 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Manchester F
American Economic Association
The Political Economics of Momentum, Persistence and Information (D8)
The Persistence of Political Partisanship: Evidence from 9/11
Sharun Mukand (University of Warwick)
Ethan Kaplan (University of Maryland)

Jan 04, 2013 2:30 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Randle B
American Economic Association
Developments in Health and Population Economics (I1)
Explaining the Birth Order Effect: The Role of Prenatal and Early Postnatal Conditions
Jee-Yeon K. Lehmann (University of Houston)
Ana Nuevo-Chiquero (University of Barcelona)
Marian Vidal-Fernandez (University of New South Wales)
The Impact of Childhood Health on Adult Educational Attainment: Evidence from Mandatory School Vaccination Laws
Dara N. Lee (University of Missouri)

Jan 04, 2013 2:30 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Edward C
American Economic Association
Medical Treatment (I1)
Presiding: Kathleen Carey (Boston University)
Technology Diffusion and Learning Spillovers in Health Care: Evidence from New Cancer Drugs
Leila Agha (Boston University)
David Molitor (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Negative Tests and the Efficiency of Medical Care: Investigating the Determinants of Imaging Overuse
Jason Abaluck (Yale University)
Leila Agha (Boston University)

Jan 05, 2013 7:45 am, Marriott Marquis & Marina, Santa Rosa
Association for Social Economics
Presidential Breakfast
Martha Starr (President, ASE) (American University) The Social Responsibility of Business Through a Social-Economics Lens

Jan 05, 2013 8:00 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Ford A
American Economic Association
Economic History (N0)
The Persistence of the Inquisitorial Mind: Long-Run Effects of the Spanish Inquisition
Jordi Vidal-Robert (Boston University)

Jan 05, 2013 8:00 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Molly A & B
American Economic Association
Discussants:
Daniele Paserman (Boston University)

Jan 05, 2013 8:00 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Edward C
American Economic Association
Recent Developments in Consumer Bankruptcy Research (K3)
Social Networks and Personal Bankruptcy
Michelle Miller (Rutgers University)

Jan 05, 2013 8:00 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Cunningham C
Econometric Society
Incentive Pay and Competition (G3)
Rising Through the Ranks: The Evolution of the Market for Corporate Executives, 1936-2003
Carola Frydman (Boston University)

Jan 05, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Elizabeth Ballroom B
American Economic Association
Default Risk and Aggregate Fluctuations (E3)
Presiding: Francois Gourio (Boston University)
Default Risk Premia and Investment in a DSGE model
Francois Gourio (Boston University)

Jan 05, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Edward A & B
American Economic Association
Youth Behavior (J1)
No Pass No Drive: Education and Allocation of Time
Rashmi Barua (Singapore Management University)
Marian Vidal Fernandez (UNSW)

Jan 05, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Randle D
American Economic Association
Economic Analysis of Environmental Policy (Q5)
Climate Change and U.S. Electric Power
Ian Sue Wing (Boston University)
Karina Veliz Roja (Boston University)
Tim Fuerst (University of Notre Dame)

Jan 05, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Manchester F
American Economic Association
Financial Policies: Lessons from Historical and Long Run Perspectives (G1)
Economic Effects of Runs on Early "Shadow Banks": Trust Companies and the Impact of the Panic of 1907
Carola Frydman (Boston University)
Eric Hilt (Wellesley College)
Lily Zhou (Federal Reserve Bank of New York)

Jan 05, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Edward C
American Economic Association
Gender, Trade and Productivity Shocks (J1)
Presiding: Claudia Olivetti (Boston University)
Discussants:
Claudia Olivetti (Boston University)

Jan 05, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Gibbons
Econometric Society
Testing (C1)
Discussants:
Hiroaki Kaido (Boston University)

Jan 05, 2013 10:15 am, Marriott Marquis & Marina, La Costa
Health Economics Research Organization
Medical Interventions and Patient Offsetting Behavior (I1)
Does Statin Use Adversely Affect Health Behaviors?
Robert Kaestner (University of Illinois and NBER)
Michael Darden (Tulane University)
Darius Lakdawalla (University of Southern California and NBER)
Wesley Yin (Boston University and NBER)

Jan 05, 2013 2:30 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Randle D
American Economic Association
Intangible Capital and Asset Prices (G1)
Customer Capital
Francois Gourio (Boston University)
Leena Rudanko (Boston University)

Jan 05, 2013 2:30 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Molly A & B
American Economic Association
Plan Choice and Switching Costs in Health Insurance Market (I1)
Dynamic Plan Choice in Medicare Part D - Quantifying Switching Costs
Chao Zhou (University of Pittsburgh)
Yuting Zhang (University of Pittsburgh)

Jan 05, 2013 2:30 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Manchester A
American Economic Association
Labor Market Networks (J2)
Discussants:
Kevin Lang (Boston University)

Jan 05, 2013 2:30 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Emma A & B
American Economic Association
The Impacts of Great Society Programs (N3)
Discussants:
Robert Margo (Boston University)

Jan 05, 2013 2:30 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Cunningham C
Econometric Society
New Developments in Empirical Modeling of Games (C5)
Random Coefficients in Static Games of Complete Information
fabian dunker (University of Goettingen)
Stefan Hoderlein (Boston College)
Hiroaki Kaido (Boston University)

Jan 05, 2013 2:30 pm, Marriott Marquis & Marina, Torrey Pines 1
Society for Computational Economics
Inference in DSGE-type models (C3)
Frequency Domain Analysis of Medium Scale DSGE Models with Application to Smets and Wouters (2007)
Zhongjun Qu (Boston University)
Denis Tkachenko (Boston University)

Jan 06, 2013 8:00 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Windsor B & C
American Economic Association
Family Formation (J1)
Why Have Divorce Rates Fallen? The Role of Women's Age at Marriage
Dana Rotz (Mathematica Policy Research)

Jan 06, 2013 8:00 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Molly A & B
American Economic Association
Health Care Labor Markets (J4)
Presiding: Patricia Cortes (Boston University)
The Relative Quality of Foreign Nurses in the US
Patricia Cortes (Boston University)
Jessica Pan (National University of Singapore)
Discussants:
Wes Yin (Boston University)

Jan 06, 2013 8:00 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Manchester G
American Economic Association
Woman and Labor Markets (J1)
Sexual Violence against Women and Labor Market Outcomes
Joseph J. Sabia (San Diego State University)
Angela Dills (Providence College)
Jeffrey DeSimone (University of Maryland)
Discussants:
Kevin Lang (Boston University)

Jan 06, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Gregory A & B
American Economic Association
Assessing the Impacts of Job Loss (J6)
The Long-Term Impact of Job Displacement in Germany during the 1982 Recession on Earnings, Income, and Employment
Johannes Schmieder (Boston University)
Till Von Wachter (Columbia University)
Stefan Bender (Institute for Employment Research)

Jan 06, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Edward A
American Economic Association
Information, Health, and Insurance (I1)
Presiding: Keith Ericson (Boston University)
How Product Standardization Affects Choice: Evidence from the Massachusetts Health Insurance Exchange
Keith Marzilli Ericson (Boston University)
Amanda Starc (University of Pennsylvania)

Jan 06, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Elizabeth Ballroom A
American Economic Association
Measurement Issues in the National Accounts
Price Indexes for Clinical Trial Research: A Feasibility Study
Ernst R. Berndt (Massachusetts Institute of Technology and NBER)
Iain M. Cockburn (Boston University and NBER)

Jan 06, 2013 10:15 am, Marriott Marquis & Marina, Cardiff & Carlsbad
American Finance Association
Compensation and Incentives (G3)
Discussants:
Carola Frydman (Boston University)

Jan 06, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, America's Cup A & B
Econometric Society
Labor Markets and the Aggregate Economy (J6)
Unions in a Frictional Labor Market
Per Krusell (Stockholm University)
Leena Rudanko (Boston University)

Jan 06, 2013 10:15 am, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Gibbons
Econometric Society
Weakly Identified Models (C2)
Presiding: Zhongjun Qu (Boston University)
Bonferroni-Based Size-Correction for Nonstandard Testing Problems
Adam McCloskey (Brown University)
Local and Global Parameter Identification in DSGE Models Allowing for Indeterminacy
Zhongjun Qu (Boston University)
Denis Tkachenko (National University of Singapore)

Jan 06, 2013 10:15 am, Marriott Marquis & Marina, Laguna
Labor & Employment Relations Association
Unionization and Occupational Licensing: Similarities and Differences (J5)
Discussants:
David Weil (Boston University)

Jan 06, 2013 10:15 am, Marriott Marquis & Marina, Torrey Pines 3
National Economic Association
The Legacy of the War on Poverty (H3)
Discussants:
Robert Margo (Boston University)

Jan 06, 2013 1:00 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Elizabeth Ballroom F
American Economic Association
Causes and Consequences of Credit Default Swap Trading (G1)
The Anatomy of the CDS Market
Martin Oehmke (Columbia University)
Adam Zawadowski (Boston University)

Jan 06, 2013 1:00 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Randle E
American Economic Association
Impacts of Unilateral Climate Change Policy (Q5)
Discussants:
Ian Sue Wing (Boston University)

Jan 06, 2013 1:00 pm, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Manchester H & I
American Economic Association

Economic Analysis of Subjective Well-being

Aggregating Subjective Well-being for Marginal Policy Adjustments

Daniel Benjamin (Cornell University)
Ori Heffetz (Cornell University)
Miles Kimball (University of Michigan)
Nichole Szembrot (Cornell University)

 

--
_________________________________________
Randall P. Ellis, Ph.D.
Professor, Department of Economics, Boston University
270 Bay State Road, Boston MA 02215 USA
tel: 617-353-2741    ellisrp@bu.edu    http://blogs.bu.edu/ellisrp/

Wolfram site for Mathematica calculations and data

BU, BUHealth, General Economics

This is from an 2010 BUHealth post, but I am reposting it now since the alpha site is still live and useful.

I thank BU alum Veronica Vargas for sending me the following link to a Wolfram alpha web site. It can be a waste of time, but it also can provide scientific, numeric, and demographic information that is calculated specific to your interests at remarkable speed.  Visit it when you have time to kill. It seems to do most simple Mathematica can do without requiring any  license.

Overview with lots of examples

http://www.wolframalpha.com/examples/

Medical test examples useful for benchmarks.

http://www.wolframalpha.com/examples/MedicalTests.html

county level info
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=suffolk+county+ma

Math results, of course, which is their traditional strength. http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x^2+sin%28x%29