Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Telling graph

Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2010 6:24:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
http://www.stat.columbia.edu...

I thought this was an interesting map about the opinions on health care reform in the US, cutting across age, income and geographic lines. It's an interesting look, even if it is 6 years old. You can draw some pretty good conclusions from the results. It won't be a surprise to some, to be sure.
Strikeeagle84015
Posts: 867
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2010 6:32:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/25/2010 6:24:32 PM, Volkov wrote:
http://www.stat.columbia.edu...

I thought this was an interesting map about the opinions on health care reform in the US, cutting across age, income and geographic lines. It's an interesting look, even if it is 6 years old. You can draw some pretty good conclusions from the results. It won't be a surprise to some, to be sure.

I find that graph a little confusing are the darker parts the ones that are opposed to health care if so
it makes sense for those on the lower end of the scale to be in support of it while those that are wealthier would oppose it
the lower echelons of society will get free health care and suffer no detriment to it whereas the upper and middle class groups will have to pay for it and receive a lower quality of medical care
: At 8/17/2010 7:17:56 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
: Hey dawg, i herd you like evangelical trolls so we put a bible thumper in yo bible thumper so you can troll while you troll!

Arguing with an atheist about God is very similar to arguing with a blind man about what the Sistine Chapel looks like
Marilyn Poe

Strikeeagle wrote
The only way I will stop believing in God is if he appeared before me and told me that he did not exist.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2010 6:33:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/25/2010 6:32:07 PM, Strikeeagle84015 wrote:
At 6/25/2010 6:24:32 PM, Volkov wrote:
http://www.stat.columbia.edu...

I thought this was an interesting map about the opinions on health care reform in the US, cutting across age, income and geographic lines. It's an interesting look, even if it is 6 years old. You can draw some pretty good conclusions from the results. It won't be a surprise to some, to be sure.

I find that graph a little confusing are the darker parts the ones that are opposed to health care
no, they are in the middle. Light Red is opposed. Light green is for.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2010 6:34:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I wanna see a graph like this for "abolish medicare, medicaid, welfare, and social security. :P"
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Strikeeagle84015
Posts: 867
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2010 6:34:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/25/2010 6:33:12 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 6/25/2010 6:32:07 PM, Strikeeagle84015 wrote:
At 6/25/2010 6:24:32 PM, Volkov wrote:
http://www.stat.columbia.edu...

I thought this was an interesting map about the opinions on health care reform in the US, cutting across age, income and geographic lines. It's an interesting look, even if it is 6 years old. You can draw some pretty good conclusions from the results. It won't be a surprise to some, to be sure.

I find that graph a little confusing are the darker parts the ones that are opposed to health care
no, they are in the middle. Light Red is opposed. Light green is for.

Sorry I probably should've meant the redder are more against while the light green is more for but that is what i meant
: At 8/17/2010 7:17:56 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
: Hey dawg, i herd you like evangelical trolls so we put a bible thumper in yo bible thumper so you can troll while you troll!

Arguing with an atheist about God is very similar to arguing with a blind man about what the Sistine Chapel looks like
Marilyn Poe

Strikeeagle wrote
The only way I will stop believing in God is if he appeared before me and told me that he did not exist.
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2010 6:51:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Alaska was a state back then...
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
Strikeeagle84015
Posts: 867
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2010 6:57:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/25/2010 6:51:54 PM, mongoose wrote:
Alaska was a state back then...

Or was it DUM DUM DUM
: At 8/17/2010 7:17:56 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
: Hey dawg, i herd you like evangelical trolls so we put a bible thumper in yo bible thumper so you can troll while you troll!

Arguing with an atheist about God is very similar to arguing with a blind man about what the Sistine Chapel looks like
Marilyn Poe

Strikeeagle wrote
The only way I will stop believing in God is if he appeared before me and told me that he did not exist.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/25/2010 7:33:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
When it's your money, it makes a difference. The majority of the populace isn't philosophically inclined.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2010 10:16:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
That's very interesting. It generally gets more green as the person is younger and also the more poor.

Except on weird exception I noticed. It's pretty weird!

Notice on the farthest left top map, one of three very green ones.

Within three states you can clearly see that the youngest people are the most conservative.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/26/2010 10:20:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
huh.... you mean people who don't have health insurance are more inclined to support free health insurance? i already knew that people were greedy :P
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 5:34:23 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
What is missing is the definition of "health care reform." If it is "a rule against insurance companies dropping people who get sick" you get one answer, while "nationalizing health care" will get another. Since "reform" has a positive sound, less sophisticated voters are more likely to favor it. How about polls on "Do you favor education reform? ... military reform? ... agriculture reform? ... government reform?" Reform sounds good, but none of those questions mean anything specific, so each person would get to assign their own meaning. In the case of health care, upper income voters are more likely to assign "government control" as the meaning of "reform," which is close to the truth.

Young people (>16, <40) rarely get sick, so they don't see a need for health insurance. Current requirements for them to buy insurance are mainly a tax to support the older population. They will eventually get old, so there is some logic to that.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 5:51:33 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I cannot understand why anyone would be opposed to a national health service.

Okay, you may pay more tax but you no longer have to pay private health insurance contributions.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 5:59:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 5:51:33 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
I cannot understand why anyone would be opposed to a national health service.

Okay, you may pay more tax but you no longer have to pay private health insurance contributions.

Really?
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 6:00:36 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 5:59:17 AM, innomen wrote:
Really?

I think he meant anyone outside of this site, which is populated by libertarians and arch-conservatives, moreso than your average community.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 6:03:51 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 6:00:36 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 6/28/2010 5:59:17 AM, innomen wrote:
Really?

I think he meant anyone outside of this site, which is populated by libertarians and arch-conservatives, moreso than your average community.

In Canada maybe. Honestly, you cannot see why the people of the US would have a problem with socialized medicine? Or "anyone" in the US would have a problem with it?
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 6:04:46 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 5:51:33 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
I cannot understand why anyone would be opposed to a national health service.

Okay, you may pay more tax but you no longer have to pay private health insurance contributions.

It's because of poor service and suppression of medical research. The government solves supply problems by rationing, usually with queues. New drugs are often extremely expensive, so governments won't pay for it. It takes about $40K for cancer drug treatment that extends life only two years. In a free market, some people will have that covered. That encourages the drug companies to develop new treatments, which eventually get cheap. Government puts an end to that.

Insurance company profits are about 8%. They earn that mainly by preventing fraud. Medicare is estimated to have more than 10% going to non-existent doctors and patients, on top of other government inefficiencies.

The US has high mortality of young people due to traffic accidents, drugs, suicides, and gang violence, but if you make it to 55 life expectancy is the best in the world. That's in spite of a diet mainly composed of cheeseburgers.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 6:10:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 6:03:51 AM, innomen wrote:
In Canada maybe. Honestly, you cannot see why the people of the US would have a problem with socialized medicine? Or "anyone" in the US would have a problem with it?

Yes, because no one in the US wants to have a national healthcare system, or even a "socialized" (lol) one.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 6:32:14 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 6:10:53 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 6/28/2010 6:03:51 AM, innomen wrote:
In Canada maybe. Honestly, you cannot see why the people of the US would have a problem with socialized medicine? Or "anyone" in the US would have a problem with it?

Yes, because no one in the US wants to have a national healthcare system, or even a "socialized" (lol) one.

The initial comment was: "I cannot understand why anyone would be opposed to a national health service." not 'no one'. Come on, really, you cannot? Even in Mass., not exactly populated by 'arch-conservatives' voted for Scott Brown as a rejection to socialized medicine (never quite understood the distinction between nationalized and socialized). We aren't Canada, we aren't Europe...yet. There will always be some layabouts or liberal feel-gooders that will want it, of course.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 7:25:50 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 6:32:14 AM, innomen wrote:
The initial comment was: "I cannot understand why anyone would be opposed to a national health service." not 'no one'. Come on, really, you cannot? Even in Mass., not exactly populated by 'arch-conservatives' voted for Scott Brown as a rejection to socialized medicine (never quite understood the distinction between nationalized and socialized). We aren't Canada, we aren't Europe...yet. There will always be some layabouts or liberal feel-gooders that will want it, of course.

I think you truly misunderstand the ideas in the US about healthcare and welfare in general, which is sad, because as a Canadian I shouldn't have to tell you this.

Do you really think all Americans think the way you or the people on this site or in Congress do about healthcare? If you go ask the lay American about medicare, SCHIIP, or any other program that offers free health services to those that need it most, do you think they're going to agree with you and any of your ideas about it (assuming you're pro-scrap-the-entire-thing-free-market-hurr-hurr)?

Go outside and ask. Please, go do it. I want to know the responses you get back. Go on now. I'm waiting, innomen.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 7:27:51 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 7:25:50 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 6/28/2010 6:32:14 AM, innomen wrote:
The initial comment was: "I cannot understand why anyone would be opposed to a national health service." not 'no one'. Come on, really, you cannot? Even in Mass., not exactly populated by 'arch-conservatives' voted for Scott Brown as a rejection to socialized medicine (never quite understood the distinction between nationalized and socialized). We aren't Canada, we aren't Europe...yet. There will always be some layabouts or liberal feel-gooders that will want it, of course.

I think you truly misunderstand the ideas in the US about healthcare and welfare in general, which is sad, because as a Canadian I shouldn't have to tell you this.

Do you really think all Americans think the way you or the people on this site or in Congress do about healthcare? If you go ask the lay American about medicare, SCHIIP, or any other program that offers free health services to those that need it most, do you think they're going to agree with you and any of your ideas about it (assuming you're pro-scrap-the-entire-thing-free-market-hurr-hurr)?

Go outside and ask. Please, go do it. I want to know the responses you get back. Go on now. I'm waiting, innomen.

Okay wait..............
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 7:31:55 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 7:27:51 AM, innomen wrote:
At 6/28/2010 7:25:50 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 6/28/2010 6:32:14 AM, innomen wrote:
The initial comment was: "I cannot understand why anyone would be opposed to a national health service." not 'no one'. Come on, really, you cannot? Even in Mass., not exactly populated by 'arch-conservatives' voted for Scott Brown as a rejection to socialized medicine (never quite understood the distinction between nationalized and socialized). We aren't Canada, we aren't Europe...yet. There will always be some layabouts or liberal feel-gooders that will want it, of course.

I think you truly misunderstand the ideas in the US about healthcare and welfare in general, which is sad, because as a Canadian I shouldn't have to tell you this.

Do you really think all Americans think the way you or the people on this site or in Congress do about healthcare? If you go ask the lay American about medicare, SCHIIP, or any other program that offers free health services to those that need it most, do you think they're going to agree with you and any of your ideas about it (assuming you're pro-scrap-the-entire-thing-free-market-hurr-hurr)?

Go outside and ask. Please, go do it. I want to know the responses you get back. Go on now. I'm waiting, innomen.

Okay wait..............

Back...boy it's hot out. Yep, they all agree with me, except some old lady who got mad and said leave her medicare alone, but i think she was confused.

I'm not saying that the people of this country do not recognize that our medical system needs to be fixed, pretty much everyone agrees with that. The role that the government takes is what worries most. The initial comment: "I cannot understand why anyone would be opposed to a national health service" is egocentric in its nature. To say this is to not understand who we are.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 7:49:15 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 7:31:55 AM, innomen wrote:
Back...boy it's hot out. Yep, they all agree with me, except some old lady who got mad and said leave her medicare alone, but i think she was confused.

Lol.

I'm not saying that the people of this country do not recognize that our medical system needs to be fixed, pretty much everyone agrees with that. The role that the government takes is what worries most. The initial comment: "I cannot understand why anyone would be opposed to a national health service" is egocentric in its nature. To say this is to not understand who we are.

And to deny it is also to not understand who you are. Americans are quite content with setting up programs - the question is the scale, the cost and the need. Which is, funnily enough, the same concerns Canadians, Europeans and everyone else has!
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 7:58:17 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 7:49:15 AM, Volkov wrote:

And to deny it is also to not understand who you are. Americans are quite content with setting up programs - the question is the scale, the cost and the need. Which is, funnily enough, the same concerns Canadians, Europeans and everyone else has!

Much of that is true, but it isn't just that. We aren't the same as the Europeans or Canadians in this respect, we are different. Our character is different as is our history. It may be changing slowly, but until then there is a sizable number of us who do not like an increase in the size of government and its scope. You think that all the libertarians in this country reside here on this site, but there are more, at least five more i think. Seriously, there is a streak of conservatism, in the sense of smaller government, that runs through the whole country, even in the democratic party there are those who say they are fiscal conservatives - which means they are not in favor of a government that has a course of steady growth.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 8:04:39 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 7:58:17 AM, innomen wrote:
Much of that is true, but it isn't just that. We aren't the same as the Europeans or Canadians in this respect, we are different. Our character is different as is our history. It may be changing slowly, but until then there is a sizable number of us who do not like an increase in the size of government and its scope. You think that all the libertarians in this country reside here on this site, but there are more, at least five more i think. Seriously, there is a streak of conservatism, in the sense of smaller government, that runs through the whole country, even in the democratic party there are those who say they are fiscal conservatives - which means they are not in favor of a government that has a course of steady growth.

That is, again, not unique to your country. The same "character" exists here in Canada in our politics. We even fought long and hard against national health care programs originally - yet you couldn't get elected in this country now if you said you wanted to destroy it.

People are just stuck on the idea and sometimes it will take a swift kick in the arse to get them to do it. Then afterwards, they love it. Where is the difference!?
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 8:12:12 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 8:04:39 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 6/28/2010 7:58:17 AM, innomen wrote:
Much of that is true, but it isn't just that. We aren't the same as the Europeans or Canadians in this respect, we are different. Our character is different as is our history. It may be changing slowly, but until then there is a sizable number of us who do not like an increase in the size of government and its scope. You think that all the libertarians in this country reside here on this site, but there are more, at least five more i think. Seriously, there is a streak of conservatism, in the sense of smaller government, that runs through the whole country, even in the democratic party there are those who say they are fiscal conservatives - which means they are not in favor of a government that has a course of steady growth.

That is, again, not unique to your country. The same "character" exists here in Canada in our politics. We even fought long and hard against national health care programs originally - yet you couldn't get elected in this country now if you said you wanted to destroy it.

People are just stuck on the idea and sometimes it will take a swift kick in the arse to get them to do it. Then afterwards, they love it. Where is the difference!?

You really think that the character of the Canadians is the same as the Americans? I mean we love you guys to death, but come on. You may have elements of that character in some of your people, but seriously?
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 8:16:01 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 8:12:12 AM, innomen wrote:
You really think that the character of the Canadians is the same as the Americans? I mean we love you guys to death, but come on. You may have elements of that character in some of your people, but seriously?

Innomen, for most of our history, we were more "conservative" than you guys. The Liberal Party was more "conservative." We share geography, history, people, and yes, attitudes. Just two different experiments is governance.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2010 8:22:42 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/28/2010 8:16:01 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 6/28/2010 8:12:12 AM, innomen wrote:
You really think that the character of the Canadians is the same as the Americans? I mean we love you guys to death, but come on. You may have elements of that character in some of your people, but seriously?

Innomen, for most of our history, we were more "conservative" than you guys. The Liberal Party was more "conservative." We share geography, history, people, and yes, attitudes. Just two different experiments is governance.

Oh no, not true at all. Volkov I think you guys are still a commonwealth of the UK yes? Do you have any idea how such an arrangement would be so despised by the average American? Again, we love you guys to death, and we love having you as neighbors, but no, you are not the same as we are in character. Our constitution is built on the restraint of government. When i was in college i had to study Canadian federalism versus German federalism (one of the most boring semesters i had to endure), and there are some similarities in the actual make up of Canada to the US, but truly, our history and culture is one that comes from a tradition of small government and restrained governmental powers.