Many voters here getting what you deserve

[IBCoupe]

I'd posit that it's only certain homeschoolers that are the brightest. Are you going to ask a complete retard where he went to school? "Daww, I was homeschooled."

Usually, you'll ask a bright person, if you're going to ask anyone at all. "Man, you're smart; where'd you go to school?" Selective sampling, ftw!

[wingFeather]

I'd posit that it's only certain homeschoolers that are the brightest. Are you going to ask a complete retard where he went to school? "Daww, I was homeschooled."

Usually, you'll ask a bright person, if you're going to ask anyone at all. "Man, you're smart; where'd you go to school?" Selective sampling, ftw!

Likewise, attending a good school does guarantee smarts. Look at Obama's Harvard.

[stebo0728]

I'd posit that it's only certain homeschoolers that are the brightest. Are you going to ask a complete retard where he went to school? "Daww, I was homeschooled."

Usually, you'll ask a bright person, if you're going to ask anyone at all. "Man, you're smart; where'd you go to school?" Selective sampling, ftw!

I thought selective sampling was par for the course.

[IBCoupe]

It most certainly is, Stebo. I just like to point out the things we take for granted.

[stebo0728]

It most certainly is, Stebo. I just like to point out the things we take for granted.

Fair enough. Any numbers can be fudged to support your case, graphs arent wroth the paper they are printed on unless you examine their scale ratio carefully. I especially hate the statistic of infant mortality that is so often used in defense of public health care system. Do a bit of research on what constitutes a "live birth" in these nations with supposed flourishing health care, and you will quickly see the disproportion. That one statistic alone, when taken in proper context, is often ample argument against public health care systems.

[IBCoupe]

Similarly, a lot of the surveys about the pitfalls of public health care are interpreted conveniently.

In reality, it's not much different than what we get, if perhaps arranged differently. The most interesting argument I've heard from proponents of a more public system was: "We already ration our healthcare. We just do it in the most illogical means: not by projected life improvement or likelihood of success, but by who can afford the bills."

[stebo0728]

Similarly, a lot of the surveys about the pitfalls of public health care are interpreted conveniently.

In reality, it's not much different than what we get, if perhaps arranged differently. The most interesting argument I've heard from proponents of a more public system was: "We already ration our healthcare. We just do it in the most illogical means: not by projected life improvement or likelihood of success, but by who can afford the bills."

I would agree with that statement at least partially, anytime you have a limited resource, there will ultimately be some type of rationing. Its unavoidable. I dont know that I necessarily agree that our current method of rationing is illogical, and I certainly wouldnt label it "most illogical".

One of the biggest arguments that I have heard for publicly controlled healthcare, is that it will ensure healthcare to people who cant pay. Well show me evidence that anyone who cant pay NOW gets refused? At least in the realm of emergency healthcare. Perhaps some people with "non-emergency" issues are turned down, but then the age old argument kick in, does that person have a RIGHT to that health care in the first place? To say yes is to say that the person has a RIGHT to a portion of the doctors time, and less directly, a RIGHT to the doctors historical sacrifice to get where he is. As asinine as it may sound in comparison, do you have a RIGHT to a portion of the lawn man's time to have your overgrown hedges trimmed? No. Because health care involves lives does not place it in a special bracket of services. NOW if we get to a point in healthcare where the government educates the doctor completely, pays his salary completely, then perhaps a person could claim some sort of RIGHT to that time and expertise. But then what part of that ISNT socialism. What part of that ISNT ideology that we fought most of the later half of the last decade AGAINST?

[IBCoupe]

And then we run into the cost argument, which is something that's always there in the background behind "rights." Would the system enjoy lower costs and higher productivity as a result of wider access to preventative care? Are emergency rooms really the most effective and efficient way of healing the sick?

As interesting as it would be to discuss, it's 30 minutes 'til I clock out for the day and my brain's toast already. Don't expect much from me on this subject; takes a lot of thinking and a lot of effort to type out to get off the ground. If you don't start a thread, I might later tonight or tomorrow morning so that we can get a lot of voices in on it.

[srellim234]

David Broder is pretty critical of both sides, too.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 04692.html