

SUGGESTIONS FOR RETIREMENT BEYOND GOLF, CARDS, COCKTAILS AND RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES Murray will discuss his experience in writing and publishing, and his familiarity with Pittsburgh sports. JoAnne will share her visual art endeavors and lifelong interest in dance and theatre. Both will chronicle their travel, being grandparents, volunteer experiences and reflections on our changing world. If you would like to share your experiences on our blog, submit your idea to us. (See our profiles.)






Keynesians view GNP as the equation of the sum of income (what consumers earn for consumption, C, and what they save, S) and what the government earns in taxes (T). This side equates with expenditures, what consumers spend for consumer goods (about 70 percent of the total), private investment (I) and government expenditures (G).
The formula, C+S+T=C+I+G, symbolizes the basic model — the left side is income, the right side is expenditure. In today’s economic scenario, consumer expenditure (C) and private investment (I) have slumped to depression levels. The only salvation under the Keynesian model is for G, government expenditures, to make up the difference. The gap in the last quarter was over 6 percent, a reduction in C and I expenditures.
C and I are about 80 percent of GNP. They are so large that increasing G must be so massive to bring GNP back to equilibrium. GNP should be about $15 trillion. The 6 percent reduction would require about $1 trillion in immediate increase in G, and possibly a continuation for one or two years.
Monetary theory also has a formula for national income: M, the money supply and V, the velocity of turnover. GNP equivalent to the Keynesian would be M times V.
In our current circumstance, V has been slowed because it is the banking system that controls it. The Bush administration operated from the perspective of “juicing” the banks, getting them to lend funds so the economic system would regain its foundation and money would flow from buyers to producers to workers in an endless cycle. Nothing wrong with the thinking, it just did not happen.
Now, there is another measure of GNP I will call micro/macro. National income is the sum of all quantities bought (Q) times their price (P). In order to clear markets (Q), P must be such that there is enough money (MV). If the money supply is curtailed by a slow down in V, P must fall, a deflation — something to be avoided at all costs — it is a psychological killer.
Conclusion. If you are a Keynesian, increasing G is your chosen route. The amounts would have to be so substantial as to be impossible to comprehend.
If you are a monetarist, finding a way to increase either M (printing press) or V (getting the banks to lend) is your answer. Our first attempt was to increase V (lending by banks). It was a failure. Printing money is a possibility, but very dangerous.
The long run solution is that liquidity must be restored, that government deficits cannot be maintained at the trillion-dollar level. The real need is to restore confidence in the money supply and those who run it, the banks and the Fed.
Steamboat Springs Today March 11, 2009
WHERE HAVE ALL THE DOCTORS GONE?
Incentives in our public and private health insurance are skewed away from prevention. The incentives for a medical graduate are to go into specialization. This incentive system has led to an excess of specialists and a paucity of preventive care primary care physicians. A recent survey of 1200 graduating medical school students indicated that only two percent were oriented to primary care. (TIME, 9/10/09). Because we have an excess of specialists, we don’t have the lines for elective surgery that exist in other countries. That is why a Canadian with means comes to the States for elective surgery. That is also why specialists, trained in Canada, come to the States to practice. To a great extent, that is why we spend over 16% of our GNP on medical care and most other countries spend (on average) 9%. That is also why our health statistics lump us with third world countries on such indicators as infant mortality. In addition, Dartmouth researcher, Elliott Fisher, M.D. suggests that too much health care may actually be killing us. His research indicates that as many as 30,000 Medicare recipients die annually from too much doctoring.
Primary care physicians report that up to sixty-five percent of what they are paid goes to administering their office. (Read Shannon Brownlee, July & August 2008 AARP Magazine, Why Does Health Care Cost So Much? Also read September 2008 AARP Bulletin.



My mother-in-law, Janet Klineman, will be 88 in February. You wouldn’t believe it to look at her, nor would you think that a lady of her young years could do so much. This diminutive four foot ten ball of fire paints, plays bridge and mah-jongg, drives everywhere, shops and takes care of her minimal health care needs. But above all, she is a Tai Chi devotee.
Starting three years ago, she took the beginning class of three months, three times. Now in her third session of the “continuing” class, she thinks she has progressed to her apex. Who knows?
She feels that continuing to perfect the 108 movements is a challenge in itself. Probably the most difficult part of Tai Chi for those her age (and much younger) is the movements requiring balance. But balance is one of the reasons Janet started on this journey. “Lift your leg like a dog finding its favorite hydrant!” What a mental picture.
Beyond the physical challenge, Janet loves the diversity of working in groups with people her daughter’s, granddaughter’s and great-granddaughter’s ages. Besides age, the group varies size, sex and culture.
Her daughter, JoAnne wishes she will be able to remain as active as her mother when she achieves this age.