House Healthcare Repeal :: Free Realms

Quote Reply

#52 Jan 25 2011 at 9:47 PM Rating: Default

gbaji

Encyclopedia

35,568 posts

Eske Esquire wrote:

You can't ascribe a figure to the amount of people who don't want repeal because of the effort required. There's no way to quantify it. It could be large, it could be small. It could be less than that 8% difference separating the two opinions. Who's to say?

...

A 50/50 split in public opinion? That could very well mean "just as unpopular as it is popular" (or, assuming that unknown % of people who oppose due to the required effort, perhaps close to it). Your characterization of it as "really really bad" stems solely from your personal standpoint. To me, I tend to think that something more like a 75/25 split would be "wildly unpopular". So no, a 40/48 split doesn't strike me as unpopular at all. It strikes me as pretty close to even. Is that not reasonable?

Let me repeat this again:

gbaji wrote:

Yes. But at the risk of repeating what I assumed was a well understood concept, not everyone who dislikes the health care law supports repealing it, and not everyone who opposes repealing the health care law likes it. You cannot say the opposite. We can assume that everyone who supports repealing it dislikes it *and* everyone who likes it opposes repeal.

What you are arguing is irrelevant. It doesn't not change the absolute fact that the total number of people who dislike the health care bill must be greater than the total number of people who support repeal of the health care bill. Thus, no amount of showing that there's a roughly 50/50 split of people who support/oppose repeal makes my original statement that "most people dislike the health care bill" false.

Get it?

Quote:

gbaji wrote:

It would be like if 50% of your customers wanted a refund for their purchase. We'd assume that it was a really really really crappy product, wouldn't we? Well, that's what the health care bill is. A really crappy product.

Flawed analogy. Political ideas and consumer products do not follow the same approval trends. Not remotely.

"Political ideas"? Sure. But we're not talking about an idea. We're talking about a very specific piece of legislation which contains very specific changes which affect pretty much every single person in the country. So yeah. The analogy does work within that context.

No analogy is an exact match. That's an unfair requirement. This one is close enough.

____________________________

King Nobby wrote:

More words please

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#53 Jan 25 2011 at 9:49 PM Rating: Decent

gbaji

Encyclopedia

35,568 posts

Sir Xsarus wrote:

gbaji wrote:

Yes. But at the risk of repeating what I assumed was a well understood concept, not everyone who dislikes the health care law supports repealing it, and not everyone who opposes repealing the health care law likes it. You cannot say the opposite. We can assume that everyone who supports repealing it dislikes it *and* everyone who likes it opposes repeal.

Polarization is another issue entirely, but goes well beyond just this topic.

That would hold water except for the fact that the people who think the health care bill is a good idea or a bad idea is also split evenly in half. That would point to the fact that by and large people either like it or hate it. Keep making up your silent majorities though.

Got a cite for that without the context of repeal or support included? A study that just asks "Do you like the new health care bill?", or something similar would be great.

____________________________

King Nobby wrote:

More words please

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#54 Jan 25 2011 at 9:54 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

gbaji wrote:

Got a cite for that without the context of repeal or support included? A study that just asks "Do you like the new health care bill?", or something similar would be great.

T'was easy

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#55 Jan 25 2011 at 9:59 PM Rating: Excellent

Xsarus

View User Forum

10,601 posts

gbaji wrote:

Sir Xsarus wrote:

gbaji wrote:

Yes. But at the risk of repeating what I assumed was a well understood concept, not everyone who dislikes the health care law supports repealing it, and not everyone who opposes repealing the health care law likes it. You cannot say the opposite. We can assume that everyone who supports repealing it dislikes it *and* everyone who likes it opposes repeal.

Polarization is another issue entirely, but goes well beyond just this topic.

That would hold water except for the fact that the people who think the health care bill is a good idea or a bad idea is also split evenly in half. That would point to the fact that by and large people either like it or hate it. Keep making up your silent majorities though.

Got a cite for that without the context of repeal or support included? A study that just asks "Do you like the new health care bill?", or something similar would be great.

You could actually read joph's first link, it was there explicitly, all by itself. you do realize that it was a collection of different polls right?

Or you can look at the one he just posted, or really any of the polls that have always pretty much showed public opinion split.

Edited, Jan 25th 2011 10:02pm by Xsarus

____________________________

01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#56 Jan 25 2011 at 10:06 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

Sir Xsarus wrote:

You could actually read joph's first link

NBC/WSJ wrote:

"From what you have heard about Barack Obama's health care plan that was passed by Congress and signed into law by the President last year, do you think his plan is a good idea or a bad idea? If you do not have an opinion either way, please just say so."

Split between "Good idea" and "Bad Idea" 39/39

ABC/Washington Post wrote:

"Overall, given what you know about them, would you say you support or oppose the changes to the health care system that have been enacted by Congress and the Obama administration?

Split 45/50 in favor of "Oppose" but 13% of those then said they oppose it because it doesn't go far enough. I don't think those people are looking to the GOP to repeal the bill.

Edited, Jan 25th 2011 10:06pm by Jophiel

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#57 Jan 25 2011 at 10:14 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1709511392366

Sage

6,471 posts

EDIT: Woops, didn't even notice the 2nd page of responses. Will address later.

gbaji wrote:

Eske Esquire wrote:

gbaji wrote:

Sure. And given that we can assume that those wanting repeal are a subset of those who don't like the health care bill, my statement still kinda stands, doesn't it? A bill has to be incredibly unpopular for the people to actually support repealing it in such numbers. Even you have to acknowledge that.

bizarro gbaji wrote:

Sure. And given that we can assume that those not wanting repeal are a subset of those who like the health care bill, my statement still kinda stands, doesn't it? A bill has to be incredibly popular for the people to actually oppose repealing it in such numbers. Even you have to acknowledge that.

That fallacious sword cuts both ways, dude.

Except that it doesn't in this case. People may like or dislike something, but to take or support action, they have to *really* like or dislike said thing. Please tell me you can grasp this concept?

You can't just change the words around. Human behavior doesn't work that way. There are lots of things you might like or dislike, but not enough to bother doing anything about. Action itself tends to meet opposition just because it requires time and effort. So when people support an action you can reasonably assume that the number that support the idea behind the action is higher. Similarly, when you count those opposed to the action, you're really counting up the total of those who are opposed to the idea behind the action *and* those who don't think it's important enough to spend the time and effort.

I should say that I do think this is a reasonable counter to part of my first post, specifically, this part:

"Sure. And given that we can assume that those not wanting repeal are a subset of those who like the health care bill, my statement still kinda stands, doesn't it?"

I was inclined to define those that aren't crazy about HCR, but don't think that the effort need be made to repeal it, as people who "like" the policy. In my head, I heard it sort of like "like it well enough". I don't think that's necessarily wrong, but gbaji's interpretation, which says that they technically would fall under the "don't like" group, is a bit more logical.

Edited, Jan 25th 2011 11:17pm by Eske

Edited, Jan 25th 2011 11:18pm by Eske

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#58 Jan 25 2011 at 10:27 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1662941810887

Scholar

9,997 posts

Quote:

It can't be any more partisan than the bill they are attempting to repeal, can it?

Does that matter? The bill actually achieves something nonpartisan (healthcare reform; i.e., actual changes), whether you agree with the partisan passing of it or not. A symbolic vote does not.

Quote:

The Nov elections was a mandate for the GOP to repeal obamacare. That's it. No amount of NY Times or CBS polls that Joph references can take the place of that.

Republicans picking up a good number of seats means America wants a healthcare bill repeal. Polls showing that they don't, don't actually count. Got it. Doesn't actually matter if Republicans picked up seats because Democrats weren't as mobilized to the polls, or if independents maybe swayed with the wind as they often do.

On the subject of the actual bill, this country desperately needs it to combat the current health trends. Currently, the health insurance industry has no actual interest in the health of the nation. Once they're actually on the hook, they'll have to actually throw some of their weight around to improve health if they want to make money.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#59 Jan 25 2011 at 10:29 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1709511392366

Sage

6,471 posts

gbaji, in the post that I was actually addressing, wrote:

incredibly unpopular

gbaji, in an attempt to red herring my own argument, wrote:

What you are arguing is irrelevant. It doesn't not change the absolute fact that the total number of people who dislike the health care bill must be greater than the total number of people who support repeal of the health care bill. Thus, no amount of showing that there's a roughly 50/50 split of people who support/oppose repeal makes my original statement that "most people dislike the health care bill" false.

Get it?

Backpedal harder. Smiley: rolleyes

gbaji wrote:

Eske wrote:

gbaji wrote:

It would be like if 50% of your customers wanted a refund for their purchase. We'd assume that it was a really really really crappy product, wouldn't we? Well, that's what the health care bill is. A really crappy product.

Flawed analogy. Political ideas and consumer products do not follow the same approval trends. Not remotely.

"Political ideas"? Sure. But we're not talking about an idea. We're talking about a very specific piece of legislation which contains very specific changes which affect pretty much every single person in the country. So yeah. The analogy does work within that context.

No analogy is an exact match. That's an unfair requirement. This one is close enough.

"Laws and consumer products do not follow the same approval trends. Not remotely." There you go. And don't dare suggest that I'm requiring an exact match. You're not even in the ballpark with this one. Just concede.

Edited, Jan 25th 2011 11:30pm by Eske

Edited, Jan 25th 2011 11:39pm by Eske

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#60 Jan 25 2011 at 10:34 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1662941810887

Scholar

9,997 posts

Quote:

I wondered why the costs just kept going up. Now the costs have gone up more than one can imagine. My Question is Why?
How? Is the Obama plan the right answer? Or is regulation and investigation into the costs and pratices a better answer? This to me is one of the reasons that the current mess that was forced upon us needs to be repealed and gone through and reworked.

The main answer to your question is that America is FAT. Within the last three decades obesity has skyrocketed, therefore the need for healthcare has skyrocketed, therefor costs have skyrocketed. The delay in the cost increase is due to the delayed impact of obesity.

It's a complicated issue to be sure, and that's not the only factor at play by a long shot, but that's the main one that can and must change to get costs under control.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#61 Jan 25 2011 at 11:14 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

Quote:

I wondered why the costs just kept going up. Now the costs have gone up more than one can imagine. My Question is Why?
How? Is the Obama plan the right answer? Or is regulation and investigation into the costs and pratices a better answer? This to me is one of the reasons that the current mess that was forced upon us needs to be repealed and gone through and reworked.

Yeah, we need some regulation and stuff so we definitely need to repeal the legislation saying that 80-85% of each dollar brought in by the insurance companies needs to actually be spent on medical costs.

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#62 Jan 26 2011 at 2:55 PM Rating: Default

__DEL__1592790358379

2,971 posts

Jophed,

Quote:

I don't think those people are looking to the GOP to repeal the bill.

And I don't think the GOP would have basically swept last years elections if the people actually supported obamacare. Of course my opinion is based on actual election results and yours are based off cbs and nbc polls.

Edited, Jan 26th 2011 3:56pm by varusword75

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#63 Jan 26 2011 at 2:57 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

varusword75 wrote:

And I don't think the GOP would have basically swept last years elections if the people actually supported obamacare. Of course my opinion is based on actual election results and yours are based off cbs and nbc polls.

Makes sense. After all, Obama crushed McCain in an electoral landslide so it stands to reason that all of America is behind Obama in all he does.

Thanks!

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#64 Jan 26 2011 at 3:12 PM Rating: Default

__DEL__1592790358379

2,971 posts

Jophed,

Quote:

Makes sense. After all, Obama crushed McCain in an electoral landslide so it stands to reason that all of America is behind Obama in all he does.

Then Obama doesn't need the help of the GOP and we can just sit back and watch him continue to ***** up the economy until next year then the people get to remedy the mistake they made. Glad we agree.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#65 Jan 26 2011 at 3:25 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

varusword75 wrote:

Glad we agree.

I, too, am glad we agree that Obama's massive victory proves that America is behind him. Let us celebrate this agreement with the consumption of mead!

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#66 Jan 26 2011 at 3:36 PM Rating: Default

__DEL__1592790358379

2,971 posts

Jophed,

Glad we agree that the landslide victory last year proves that after only 2yrs the american people are sick to death of obamanomics and ready to throw the Dems out of power.

Edited, Jan 26th 2011 4:36pm by varusword75

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#67 Jan 26 2011 at 3:43 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

varusword75 wrote:

Glad we agree

Yes, we already agreed that America think Obama is the most super-awesomest best president EVER!!!

I appreciate your enthusiasm in saying it again though. It's obvious that you love Obama as well! HOORAY!

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#68 Jan 26 2011 at 4:13 PM Rating: Default

gbaji

Encyclopedia

35,568 posts

Kachi wrote:

Quote:

It can't be any more partisan than the bill they are attempting to repeal, can it?

Does that matter? The bill actually achieves something nonpartisan ...

No, it doesn't. I suspect this is just the first element of why you're not getting the argument from the "other side". It's also indicative of why we keep getting into arguments about who's being partisan and who isn't.

Passing a big government health care bill isn't non-partisan. It starts out being partisan. Calling the other guy partisan for opposing it is incredibly unfair.

____________________________

King Nobby wrote:

More words please

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#69 Jan 27 2011 at 5:24 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1662941810887

Scholar

9,997 posts

Quote:

No, it doesn't. I suspect this is just the first element of why you're not getting the argument from the "other side". It's also indicative of why we keep getting into arguments about who's being partisan and who isn't.

Passing a big government health care bill isn't non-partisan. It starts out being partisan. Calling the other guy partisan for opposing it is incredibly unfair.

I don't think you get me. The bill itself is not a "partisan" thing. It's a "legislation" thing. i.e., the bill may have been partisan, but it wasn't done for partisan's sake. Democrats didn't pass the bill to be like, "Yeah, take THAT Republicans! **** YOU!" They passed the bill to accomplish an objective for the people. Of course Republicans and Democrats disagreed with one another (and even among themselves) on the bill.

However, this "symbolic victory" meant no real change to the people and never stood a chance of making a difference for them. It was a GOP circle-jerk, and a totally partisan event. It wasn't a "Let's solve us some problems!" move, but a "Suck it, Dems!" move.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#70 Jan 27 2011 at 7:29 AM Rating: Decent

rdmcandie

View User Forum

Scholar

7,566 posts

Quote:

Passing a big government health care bill isn't non-partisan. It starts out being partisan. Calling the other guy partisan for opposing it is incredibly unfair.

No but calling the other guy partisan because he doesn't like it but refuses to say why he doesn't or offer ideas to make it in his mind better, is fair. The Repubs basically offered nothing in the way of support, be it votes, or ideas for a majority of the important things that took place over the last few years. They were playing as a party, and as a party decided they would let the Dems handle things mostly alone, because if it blows up in their face then the Repubs involved won't be on the hook for the blame game. If the Dems didn't control the house AND senate nothing would have gotten done.

The real test is on the Dems to show they won't be the "party of no". Considering they can basically delay/stop any republican motion.

____________________________

HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#71 Jan 27 2011 at 10:19 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1595780782613

View User Forum

Sage

764 posts

I'd be more interested in a poll about the health care plan if one of the rules was you could vote in it only if you could name 3 of the aspects of the plan first. And the fact that Obama's name is on it doesn't count.

--DK

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#72 Jan 27 2011 at 10:44 AM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

- Death panels!
- Socialist!
- Government Take-over!

Can I take the poll now? I can say "Job Killer!" for #3 if you think #2 & #3 are too similar.

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top