Health Care Debate Based on Total Lack of Logic - Yahoo! News »
Posted By splitrch 4 months, 1 week ago in Political NewsHeated partisan debate over President Obama's health care plan, erupting at town hall meetings and in the blogosphere, has more to do with our illogical thought processes than reality, sociologists are finding.
Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com »
164 Views Share Story 27 Comments Report
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 27 (view all)
-
-
0%
Klarissa4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
""I think strategically it's important that the Obama administration and advocates of a health care plan really pay attention to how people feel and the symbolism they are seeing, and not just the nuts and bolts of the policy," Perrin said. "People don't reason with pure facts and logic alone."
Reply
-
-
43%
BB644 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, the logic behind those who fear a national program is based upon simple things.
Reply
1) Canada is always listed as an example of national health. Much as it is in the UK, it's a system plagued by delays and problems.
2) This is the same administration that can't seem to explain how you spend almost a 1 trillion dollars on a stimulus and it does nothing to the economy. They look to a few years ago when the government sent out $600.00, the reaction was almost immediate. Most feel if you want to build alternative energy sources, new train systems and other long term, left-wing plans, you shouldn't try to claim is as a part of a stimulus.
3) Cash for clunkers. Right now there are thousands of dealers unsure whether they will be paid the money owed them by the program. No one knows exact numbers and it seems they're using FAA personnel to process the paperwork. If the government can't seem to send out simple rebates, people question how they plan to handle our health care.
4) We don't trust government. Over the 40-50 years, social programs have grown to be about 60% of our government. It's generally one handout or another. When proposed, it doesn't matter which one, one set of numbers is floated out there but that's never the actual cost. As taxpayers, we're tired of hearing how we need to help someone and told one cost only to find it's 5 or 10 times that actual number.
5) We don't understand how a monopoly is a good thing. If we move to single payer, how does that control costs? Without comptetition, there is no reason to control costs.-
77%
Beau78904 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That's a perfect example of the irrational thinking the article speaks of, BB64.
Reply
The government-run, one-option-only, single-payer system you're so worried about is off the table, and everyone has said so for several months. If you read any of the bills before Congress, you'd know that. Yet you've formed opinions based on irrational fear. -
67%
mesodude4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"1) Canada is always listed as an example of national health. Much as it is in the UK, it's a system plagued by delays and problems."
Reply
--Even if you could prove that Canada's health care system was FUBAR (which you can't), you're still not being reasonable or logical because this would not represent ironclad proof that government subsidized health insurance could never work. Just because you can prove that government is inefficient or incompetent at times doesn't mean you've proved that government is inherently incompetent and inefficient. We know that private insurance hasn't worked for us for many decades. We know that for profit insurance *hasn't* worked for many Americans and yet right wingers seem to think we should go on with an extremely flawed system indefinitely-- as long as it serves *their* agenda.
"2) This is the same administration that can't seem to explain how you spend almost a 1 trillion dollars on a stimulus and it does nothing to the economy."
--You're choosing to be ignorant. Define "nothing." Have you been living under a rock for the last couple of months? You've been told many times that in order to stop a plane plummeting to the ground from crashing, you must first bring it out of a tailspin. Bringing it out of a tailspin doesn't mean you're in the clear. It means you're in *less* danger than you would be if the plane was still hurtling out of control. -
50%
mesodude4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"They look to a few years ago when the government sent out $600.00, the reaction was almost immediate."
Reply
--You're comparing the pile of crap Bush left behind with the downturn we had a couple of years ago?! Are you freaking serious?
"Most feel if you want to build alternative energy sources, new train systems and other long term, left-wing plans, you shouldn't try to claim is as a part of a stimulus."
--Which "most" feels this way? Most twenty percenters?
"Cash for clunkers. Right now there are thousands of dealers unsure whether they will be paid the money owed them by the program."
--You're choosing to look at only the negative. This has had glitches but it's been mostly positive for our economy. You're biased and you *need* to slam anything Obama does because if he succeds, you don't get your way. That's what this is all about. Bitterness and partisanship on the part of cons who won't give Obama credit where it's due.
"We don't trust government. Over the 40-50 years, social programs have grown to be about 60% of our government. It's generally one handout or another."
--No one cares what you trust, BB. You people *selectively* don't trust government. You're also selectively against "socialism". That's why YOU can't be trusted. If you say you don't trust government, you can't cherry pick when you get upset about waste, fraud, abuse, and excessive spending. That makes you look like a hypocrite.
"We don't understand how a monopoly is a good thing."
--You don't understand that you're protecting a monopoly when you support the status quo. When insurance companies can afford to spend 1.5 million dollars per day in advertising to save their @sses, there's probably a reason why. $$$$$$$$
-
-
75%
mesodude4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks, splitrch. Excellent submission. I think this could be applied to many, many issues on which we've witnessed people shoot first and never bother to ask questions of themselves--now or later.
Reply
Granted there are lots of people who have been terrorized by those who deliberately misinform. However, from my perspective, for many people it's not so much that they lack the ability to be rational but rather that they have been conditioned to prejudge and reject the other side as the enemy--regardless of the facts.
That's why we encounter Propeller members who will say things like "I don't need to know the facts to know that I don't want socialism" or "I don't need to be a scientist" (or "I don't need to consider how many hundreds of billions are potentially at stake for my side in the global warming debate") to know that global warming is a socialist plot to destroy capitalism."
I can say 1+1=2 and it will be rejected out of hand simply because *I* said it. The message from the other side is, "I don't have all (or any) of the facts to support my position but who cares? I want my side to win so what you say doesn't matter. My agenda is more important than the truth." ;-( -
60%
albionperfides4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BB64
Reply
"1. Canada is always listed as an example of national health. Much as it is in the UK, it's a system plagued by delays and problems."
How do you, personally, know? Have you been treated in the NHS in the UK or are you repeating hearsay? If the latter it's unadmissable evidence. Quite clearly you can afford,at the moment, your medical insurance but one day.......-
67%
Candida4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
albionperfides: "Quite clearly you can afford,at the moment, your medical insurance but one day......."
Reply
I think he is a veteran or an active member of the military, so the government looks after his health care.
It is health care for others, especially the poor, that he is against, whether it's Canadian style, British style, or any other style.
-
-
80%
Candida4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA: 'Hoffman's idea is based on a study he and colleagues did of nearly 50 participants, who were all Republican...
Reply
(The findings should apply to any political bent. "We're not making the claim that Democratic or liberal partisans don't do the same thing. They do," Hoffman said.)'
Well, I believe it when I see some solid evidence presented. People who deal with irrational thinking, should know how dangerous it is to generalize beyond the range of their observations.-
Neutral
willottica4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I believe it because I saw it in myself. I've always considered myself rational, considering, and objective. When I joined the NDP to run for office, this is the EXACT process that I observed in myself:
Reply
Rather than start with the facts and work my way towards a conclusion, I started with the conclusion (i.e. the official platform of the NDP) and gathered facts to support it. The subconscious, internal rationalization was actually a little bit frightening. I think it's only because of my normal objectivity that I was able to see what was happening to me.
-
-
0%
Redneck4 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
READ the bill. Educated minds can see the deep flaws and there are alternates to the government taking over which are not being considered The gov IS ineffective and inefficient look at the postal system AND Medicare and Medicade AND the Veterans Medical ssystem for evidence. The government has caused much of the rise in health insurance. Get them out and let the market function.
Reply
The crisis (47 Million uninsured) is bogus! -
More News
The Huffington Post
Hale "Bonddad" Stewart: Trust the Numbers
Kathy Freston: Flu Season: Factory Farming Could Cause A Catastrophic Pandemic
Chris Kelly: A Horrible Thing to Think About Casey Johnson
Seun Adebiyi: Help Save My Life: Sign Up For The National Marrow Donor Program
Huff TV: Arianna Talks About Misplaced Priorities In Fighting Terrorism (VIDEO)
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.