Healthcare reform

[StrangeSox]

This is the point people seem to miss when it comes to government run programs. Entitlement aside, the fact is, the government is the only entity in the free world that is able to run a business in the red -- it can be in debt, it can over spend and it can make NO money and never be affected.

 

If private health insurance has to compete with an entity that doesn't have to make a profit, they stand no chance. And that's how government insurance would work. If they went over budget -- so what -- tax people -- tax something, anything...doesn't matter. If Blue Cross, for example, doesn't make a profit, they go bankrupt.

 

Big difference.

 

Why aren't all private schools out of business then?

[Y2HH]

Why aren't all private schools out of business then?

 

Because that's the same thing.

 

This marks my exit from this thread.

Edited July 28, 2009 by Y2HH

[bmags]

Well, I've been polled, therefore everyone has been polled and polling is great!

[lostfan]

I don't know how they got their data -- or what data of their overall collection of data was used, or where it came from, or who it came from.

 

I've heard of polls my entire life...you know how many times I or someone I know has been polled in relation to any of this?

 

Zero.

lol are you saying polls are completely made up?

 

How was Nate Silver able to predict 49 of 50 states for the 2008 election (missing Indiana by just a couple of points) after adjusting the various models and combining them?

[Y2HH]

lol are you saying polls are completely made up?

 

How was Nate Silver able to predict 49 of 50 states for the 2008 election (missing Indiana by just a couple of points) after adjusting the various models and combining them?

 

No, I'm not saying their all made up -- I am saying that for certain circumstances they can be manipulated for various reasons.

 

There would be no point in manipulating live election data -- as the actual counts will show the truth regardless of what the poll is manipulated to show.

 

However, if you were looking to prove something as "majority", such as a cause you care about on one side or the other, you could manipulate it to show your side/opinion is the majority therefore right. How? Easy. When people exit the Hospital, ask, "Were you treated well?!" If they answer YES, you ask them to take a more extensive poll. However, if they answer NO, you let them walk away...or let 1 in 10 NO's walk away, just so you can show there ARE some on the other side and make the results look more balanced.

 

I did a project in statistics class in college about this very subject -- and we were able to successful manipulate every poll, no matter how basic it was so long as the 'whole' data wasn't able to be collected. However, manipulating something like an election count isn't something you'd care to do, because it can be shown you are wrong. It's not often wise to try to manipulate data from a whole -- as the whole will still come together in the end. But if you can take just a slice of that whole, and represent it as if it were the whole then you can get the results you are looking for.

 

It can be pretty complicated, but I'm sure you understand what I mean.

Edited July 28, 2009 by Y2HH

[bmags]

but because something CAN BE MANIPULATED does not mean it IS. That's why science journals have standards for what they publish, that's why margin of error must be reported, that's why the set of questioning used is documented, that's why who is funding IS FORCED TO BE REPORTED.

 

 

[lostfan]

but because something CAN BE MANIPULATED does not mean it IS. That's why science journals have standards for what they publish, that's why margin of error must be reported, that's why the set of questioning used is documented, that's why who is funding IS FORCED TO BE REPORTED.

^^

[bmags]

Honestly Y2HH what you are claiming right now can be compared to someone saying you can't believe pictures because photoshop exists.

[Y2HH]

but because something CAN BE MANIPULATED does not mean it IS. That's why science journals have standards for what they publish, that's why margin of error must be reported, that's why the set of questioning used is documented, that's why who is funding IS FORCED TO BE REPORTED.

 

This would hold some credibility...if all polls were published ONLY in science journals. They aren't.

 

Last I checked CNN or some various newspaper isn't a science journal under the same scrutiny. Nor are a lot of non science related administrations/sections of business/government, etc.

[StrangeSox]

Because that's the same thing.

 

This marks my exit from this thread.

 

Government running a non-profit business against private for-profit and non-profit businesses. How is it so starkly different?

 

Also, if the government plan isn't as good, people will pay more for more value from the private plans. If they can offer comparable value for lower cost w/ no profit, what exactly am I supposed to have a problem with?

[Y2HH]

Honestly Y2HH what you are claiming right now can be compared to someone saying you can't believe pictures because photoshop exists.

 

No, I'm not.

 

As you can often check for photo manipulations (at least pros can) -- whereas with poll data, you cannot fact check them unless you were standing there with the pollster to see how they collected said data.

[lostfan]

Honestly Y2HH what you are claiming right now can be compared to someone saying you can't believe pictures because photoshop exists.

i had a friend tell me this once when I got a tattoo, she didn't believe me, I showed her a picture as proof and she said she still didn't believe me because I could've photoshopped it.

[StrangeSox]

No, I'm not.

 

As you can often check for photo manipulations (at least pros can) -- whereas with poll data, you cannot fact check them unless you were standing there with the pollster to see how they collected said data.

 

This is incorrect.

[Y2HH]

Government running a non-profit business against private for-profit and non-profit businesses. How is it so starkly different?

 

Also, if the government plan isn't as good, people will pay more for more value from the private plans. If they can offer comparable value for lower cost w/ no profit, what exactly am I supposed to have a problem with?

 

There in lies a problem.

 

Say the government plan isn't good -- but it takes people 6 months or a year to see that (because they didn't need to go to the hospital/doctor for that long, or even longer), how are the private companies supposed to stay in business in the mean time?

 

Are we pretending that if people went to a public plan the private companies would just wait it out?

 

The reality is, that may happen, but in the mean time, when people go "try the government teet plan", the privates go under, and then there is no private plan for you to return too.

[bmags]

This would hold some credibility...if all polls were published ONLY in science journals. They aren't.

 

Last I checked CNN or some various newspaper isn't a science journal under the same scrutiny. Nor are a lot of non science related administrations/sections of business/government, etc.

 

Newspapers publish who did the poll, describe their function and give margin of error. Polling companies give the breakdown of the demographics polled, time of day polled, how they were reached, etc. THis poll didn't come from CNN. CNN and the like do what they specifically say is a non-scientific poll.

 

"We can test that question with data from a set of surveys known as the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems. CAHPS is an initiative of the Department of Health and Human Services that developed a standardized survey questionnaire used by virtually all health insurance plans -- public and private -- to assess patient satisfaction. Most private insurers use the CAHPS questionnaire and disclose the data to the National Committee for Quality Assurance in order to receive their accreditation. So thanks to CAHPS, we have a massive collection of data comparisons of how patients experience and rate Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance."

[Y2HH]

This is incorrect.

 

Ask me to take a poll for you -- any poll -- ill even turn in all my collected data. But you can't be there when I collect that data.

 

I bet I can show you whatever I want. How are you going to know what I did to get it?

 

You don't.

 

So no, it's not incorrect unless you assume I follow all of your rules, but reality is, I don't have to do so.

[Y2HH]

Newspapers publish who did the poll, describe their function and give margin of error. Polling companies give the breakdown of the demographics polled, time of day polled, how they were reached, etc. THis poll didn't come from CNN. CNN and the like do what they specifically say is a non-scientific poll.

 

"We can test that question with data from a set of surveys known as the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems. CAHPS is an initiative of the Department of Health and Human Services that developed a standardized survey questionnaire used by virtually all health insurance plans -- public and private -- to assess patient satisfaction. Most private insurers use the CAHPS questionnaire and disclose the data to the National Committee for Quality Assurance in order to receive their accreditation. So thanks to CAHPS, we have a massive collection of data comparisons of how patients experience and rate Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance."

 

I'm convinced. All polls are accurate!

 

I work for Blue Cross, I have for years, BTW, and I've never heard of CAHPS. Again...what "private insurers" use this? Funny how that's omitted. I love some of the language in there. Used by *virtually* all. Ok, so not all, but some...but which some...we don't actually say.

 

Meh.

[bmags]

Ask me to take a poll for you -- any poll -- ill even turn in all my collected data. But you can't be there when I collect that data.

 

I bet I can show you whatever I want. How are you going to know what I did to get it?

 

You don't.

 

So no, it's not incorrect unless you assume I follow all of your rules, but reality is, I don't have to do so.

 

oh my god.

 

how many examples do you have of a polling agency who took a poll - Published the full poll as all are, with what questions were asked, demographics polled, time of day, answers, non answers, hang ups, etc. - but all of this data was lies. Instead of asking "do you approve of this bill" they actually asked "this bill will kill you and all your loved ones, will you vote for it?".

 

How many examples are there of this? Rasmussen is famous for their somewhat loaded questions, and they still report the questions. THey still report the demographics polled and reasoning behind it.

[Y2HH]

I think I agree with Jesse Ventura -- I'm not sure when it happened, but wow...raising questions has become a bad thing, apparently. Even here on Sox Talk.

 

I have questions...so we should jump on Y2HH and try to belittle him so nobody takes him seriously anymore and his opinions and questions no longer hold water.

 

I guess that's just the modern time.

 

I apologize for questioning the validity of polls.

 

I apologize for questioning the governments ability to run health care.

 

I apologize for having questions -- I don't know why I do -- I mean, you guys have all the answers, it seems.

 

I'll just fall in line and listen to everything you say, nod in agreement like a good little lemming, and maybe you'll give me a chocolate chip cookie now and again.

 

I'd rather not.

[bmags]

I'm convinced. All polls are accurate!

 

I work for Blue Cross, I have for years, BTW, and I've never heard of CAHPS. Again...what "private insurers" use this? Funny how that's omitted. I love some of the language in there. Used by *virtually* all. Ok, so not all, but some...but which some...we don't actually say.

 

Meh.

 

in my minimal experience of studying public policy, I ran into CAHPS in two of the four papers, albeit they were on medicare/SCHIP. I ran into them in numerous political science journalis, such as publius. It is a government agency. In the publishings, all the data required was published in it. This is the way the world works.

[Y2HH]

oh my god.

 

how many examples do you have of a polling agency who took a poll - Published the full poll as all are, with what questions were asked, demographics polled, time of day, answers, non answers, hang ups, etc. - but all of this data was lies. Instead of asking "do you approve of this bill" they actually asked "this bill will kill you and all your loved ones, will you vote for it?".

 

How many examples are there of this? Rasmussen is famous for their somewhat loaded questions, and they still report the questions. THey still report the demographics polled and reasoning behind it.

 

I apologize, you're right.

 

I'm wrong.

 

I don't know why I questioned it.

[bmags]

I think I agree with Jesse Ventura -- I'm not sure when it happened, but wow...raising questions has become a bad thing, apparently. Even here on Sox Talk.

 

I have questions...so we should jump on Y2HH and try to belittle him so nobody takes him seriously anymore and his opinions and questions no longer hold water.

 

I guess that's just the modern time.

 

I apologize for questioning the validity of polls.

 

I apologize for questioning the governments ability to run health care.

 

I apologize for having questions -- I don't know why I do -- I mean, you guys have all the answers, it seems.

 

I'll just fall in line and listen to everything you say, nod in agreement like a good little lemming, and maybe you'll give me a chocolate chip cookie now and again.

 

I'd rather not.

 

Hey sarah palin what's up

 

[StrangeSox]

You know what's awesome? Straw men. I love straw men.

 

edit: I'm not belittling you, I'm belittling illogical reasoning, such as broadly dismissing all polls on the grounds that some may be manipulated. You're not questioning the validity but declaring all invalid.

Edited July 28, 2009 by StrangeSox

[lostfan]

I think I agree with Jesse Ventura -- I'm not sure when it happened, but wow...raising questions has become a bad thing, apparently. Even here on Sox Talk.

 

I have questions...so we should jump on Y2HH and try to belittle him so nobody takes him seriously anymore and his opinions and questions no longer hold water.

 

I guess that's just the modern time.

 

I apologize for questioning the validity of polls.

 

I apologize for questioning the governments ability to run health care.

 

I apologize for having questions -- I don't know why I do -- I mean, you guys have all the answers, it seems.

 

I'll just fall in line and listen to everything you say, nod in agreement like a good little lemming, and maybe you'll give me a chocolate chip cookie now and again.

 

I'd rather not.

Holy strawman. No one is belittling you, only the validity of your arguments. You're not a thin-skinned guy, why do this?

[Y2HH]

Hey sarah palin what's up

 

I assume that was an attempt to belittle me?

 

Again.

 

I truly feel that what I said it true...asking questions in this era has become a bad thing.

 

Look, I'm sorry I don't agree that polls are accurate -- even if you do -- you haven't convinced me they are, either.

 

I question them. I question everything. I will continue to question everything...it's what makes me who I am.

 

You -- you're whoever "they" want you to be, apparantly.

 

"They" even got you to use Sarah Palin as an insult.

 

Way to go. You used a persons name to belittle another person.

 

You're a wonderful representation of SoxTalk.