Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Shoot the shit with other metal folk. Free discussion on any topic that doesn't suit the other forums. Avoid mentioning carpet.
Post Reply
User avatar
Abzu
Postwhore
Posts: 45528
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 08:35
Location: next door

Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Abzu »

http://www.physorg.com/news170070531.html



August 21st, 2009



(PhysOrg.com) -- In a study published in the most recent issue of the journal Sociological Inquiry, sociologists from four major research institutions focus on one of the most curious aspects of the 2004 presidential election: the strength and resilience of the belief among many Americans that Saddam Hussein was linked to the terrorist attacks of 9/11.



Although this belief influenced the 2004 election, they claim it did not result from pro-Bush propaganda, but from an urgent need by many Americans to seek justification for a war already in progress.



The findings may illuminate reasons why some people form false beliefs about the pros and cons of health-care reform or regarding President Obama's citizenship, for example.



The study, "There Must Be a Reason: Osama, Saddam and Inferred Justification" calls such unsubstantiated beliefs "a serious challenge to democratic theory and practice" and considers how and why it was maintained by so many voters for so long in the absence of supporting evidence.



Co-author Steven Hoffman, Ph.D., visiting assistant professor of sociology at the University at Buffalo, says, "Our data shows substantial support for a cognitive theory known as 'motivated reasoning,' which suggests that rather than search rationally for information that either confirms or disconfirms a particular belief, people actually seek out information that confirms what they already believe.



"In fact," he says, "for the most part people completely ignore contrary information.



"The study demonstrates voters' ability to develop elaborate rationalizations based on faulty information," he explains.



While numerous scholars have blamed a campaign of false information and innuendo from the Bush administration, this study argues that the primary cause of misperception in the 9/11-Saddam Hussein case was not the presence or absence of accurate data but a respondent's desire to believe in particular kinds of information.



"The argument here is that people get deeply attached to their beliefs," Hoffman says.



"We form emotional attachments that get wrapped up in our personal identity and sense of morality, irrespective of the facts of the matter. The problem is that this notion of 'motivated reasoning' has only been supported with experimental results in artificial settings. We decided it was time to see if it held up when you talk to actual voters in their homes, workplaces, restaurants, offices and other deliberative settings."



The survey and interview-based study was conducted by Hoffman, Monica Prasad, Ph.D., assistant professor of sociology at Northwestern University; Northwestern graduate students Kieren Bezila and Kate Kindleberger; Andrew Perrin, Ph.D., associate professor of sociology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; and UNC graduate students Kim Manturuk, Andrew R. Payton and Ashleigh Smith Powers (now an assistant professor of political science and psychology at Millsaps College).



The study addresses what it refers to as a "serious challenge to democratic theory and practice that results when citizens with incorrect information cannot form appropriate preferences or evaluate the preferences of others."



One of the most curious "false beliefs" of the 2004 presidential election, they say, was a strong and resilient belief among many Americans that Saddam Hussein was linked to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.



Hoffman says that over the course of the 2004 presidential campaign, several polls showed that majorities of respondents believed that Saddam Hussein was either partly or largely responsible for the 9/11 attacks, a percentage that declined very slowly, dipping below 50 percent only in late 2003.



"This misperception that Hussein was responsible for the Twin Tower terrorist attacks was very persistent, despite all the evidence suggesting that no link existed," Hoffman says.



The study team employed a technique called "challenge interviews" on a sample of voters who reported believing in a link between Saddam and 9/11. The researchers presented the available evidence of the link, along with the evidence that there was no link, and then pushed respondents to justify their opinion on the matter. For all but one respondent, the overwhelming evidence that there was no link left no impact on their arguments in support of the link.



One unexpected pattern that emerged from the different justifications that subjects offered for continuing to believe in the validity of the link was that it helped citizens make sense of the Bush Administration's decision to go to war against Iraq.



"We refer to this as 'inferred justification,'" says Hoffman "because for these voters, the sheer fact that we were engaged in war led to a post-hoc search for a justification for that war.



"People were basically making up justifications for the fact that we were at war," he says.



"One of the things that is really interesting about this, from both the perspective of voting patterns but also for democratic theory more generally, Hoffman says, "is that we did not find that people were being duped by a campaign of innuendo so much as they were actively constructing links and justifications that did not exist.



"They wanted to believe in the link," he says, "because it helped them make sense of a current reality. So voters' ability to develop elaborate rationalizations based on faulty information, whether we think that is good or bad for democratic practice, does at least demonstrate an impressive form of creativity."



Source: University at Buffalo
ANGEL OF DESEASE wrote:the path of whoring is something wicked and grim, and very philosophical.
;,,;
Noyka
Ancient One
Posts: 4744
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 08:16
Location: California

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Noyka »

"The findings may illuminate reasons why some people form false beliefs about the pros and cons of health-care reform or regarding President Obama's citizenship, for example."



So in other words anyone who isn't on the left is forming false beliefs? If they wanted to be fair they could have brought in 9/11 truthers as well, otherwise this is a whole lot of nothing. Duh people form false beliefs and duh a lot of people only search facts to support what they believe is truth this happens on both sides. Morals and emotion is a part of everything we do, I don't see why we need a study saying this.



Most people upset over Obama's birth certificate are not saying he's not a citizen. They're upset because he ran on the platform of transparency yet none of his records are available to the public. To them this is highly hypocritical, and I agree with them. Do I think he's a citizen? Yes, there's tons of evidence to support this as well. Only loons are saying he's not a citizen.



Duh Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 anyone who believes that is highly misguided, they're as misguided as those who believe the government planted bombs. The whole Iraq war is one giant mess, anyone with common sense knows that. It's like Vietnam, good intentions handled and executed terribly.
User avatar
vO)))id
Metal God
Posts: 12201
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 14:44

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by vO)))id »

I've been saying that from the beginning:



It's like Vietnam.
User avatar
Charles Bronson
God of Emptiness
Posts: 618
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 07:25

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Charles Bronson »

Well in our defense, we saved the Iraq people. Although they're fucked now, due to instability.



I personally think it was a fuck up, but oh well. This is our world.
User avatar
Abzu
Postwhore
Posts: 45528
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 08:35
Location: next door

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Abzu »

[quote name="Noyka"]"The findings may illuminate reasons why some people form false beliefs about the pros and cons of health-care reform or regarding President Obama's citizenship, for example."



So in other words anyone who isn't on the left is forming false beliefs? If they wanted to be fair they could have brought in 9/11 truthers as well, otherwise this is a whole lot of nothing. Duh people form false beliefs and duh a lot of people only search facts to support what they believe is truth this happens on both sides. Morals and emotion is a part of everything we do, I don't see why we need a study saying this.



Most people upset over Obama's birth certificate are not saying he's not a citizen. They're upset because he ran on the platform of transparency yet none of his records are available to the public. To them this is highly hypocritical, and I agree with them. Do I think he's a citizen? Yes, there's tons of evidence to support this as well. Only loons are saying he's not a citizen.



Duh Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 anyone who believes that is highly misguided, they're as misguided as those who believe the government planted bombs. The whole Iraq war is one giant mess, anyone with common sense knows that. It's like Vietnam, good intentions handled and executed terribly.[/quote]

I figured you'd turn this into a political rant. :judge:

They used an example. A good one too, as there are no "death panels" in any of the three potential health care reform bills I read but people took outright lies and went all out with them.



They studied it because no one else has done a study on it.



btw I agree about the birthers.
ANGEL OF DESEASE wrote:the path of whoring is something wicked and grim, and very philosophical.
;,,;
Noyka
Ancient One
Posts: 4744
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 08:16
Location: California

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Noyka »

[quote name="abzu"]
[quote name="Noyka"]"The findings may illuminate reasons why some people form false beliefs about the pros and cons of health-care reform or regarding President Obama's citizenship, for example."



So in other words anyone who isn't on the left is forming false beliefs? If they wanted to be fair they could have brought in 9/11 truthers as well, otherwise this is a whole lot of nothing. Duh people form false beliefs and duh a lot of people only search facts to support what they believe is truth this happens on both sides. Morals and emotion is a part of everything we do, I don't see why we need a study saying this.



Most people upset over Obama's birth certificate are not saying he's not a citizen. They're upset because he ran on the platform of transparency yet none of his records are available to the public. To them this is highly hypocritical, and I agree with them. Do I think he's a citizen? Yes, there's tons of evidence to support this as well. Only loons are saying he's not a citizen.



Duh Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 anyone who believes that is highly misguided, they're as misguided as those who believe the government planted bombs. The whole Iraq war is one giant mess, anyone with common sense knows that. It's like Vietnam, good intentions handled and executed terribly.[/quote]

I figured you'd turn this into a political rant. :judge:

They used an example. A good one too, as there are no "death panels" in any of the three potential health care reform bills I read but people took outright lies and went all out with them.



They studied it because no one else has done a study on it.



btw I agree about the birthers.[/quote]



The point most who don't support Obama's healthcare plan are making is why wreck what's working for 80% of the country. WE do need reform but not regression. A government take over has never worked and won't work here. His model has been used in Canada and the UK both of which have, for the most part, broken systems.



They're flat out lying? Why? It's happened in every other country, a panel of people who don't even know you decide what your doctor can and can't do based on costs that's how it works. Obama has said you can keep your current plan but the bill directly states as soon as rates change you have to go to a government approved healthcare plan. This discourages competition and in the long run will increase costs causing rationing and doctor shortages just like everywhere else similar plans have been put in place.



You see there is reason behind concerns people have, it's not irrational like everyone wants to make it out to be. What is irrational is the name calling some have particepated in, nazis, evil, racists, unamerican just because they disagree with their policies.



We should work on tort reform, you know going after an actual special interest group. This would cut a lot of costs.



Sorry for ranting again :redneck:
User avatar
Holocaust
Metal God
Posts: 10733
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 07:03
Location: Your mom

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Holocaust »

I got laid off from work and lost my insurance that I had through my job. Now I sure as shit can't afford health insurance on my own. What are people like me supposed to do in the event of sudden crippling illness or dismemberment? Go to the hospital anyway? And spend the next 10-20 years paying for some retarded MRI scans that don't find anything or x-rays that turn your cells green? Fuck that shit.
Image
User avatar
zim
Zim(a)
Posts: 26226
Joined: 14 Apr 2009, 02:36
Location: couch

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by zim »

[quote name="Lerzeig Redek"]I got laid off from work and lost my insurance that I had through my job. Now I sure as shit can't afford health insurance on my own. What are people like me supposed to do in the event of sudden crippling illness or dismemberment? Go to the hospital anyway? And spend the next 10-20 years paying for some retarded MRI scans that don't find anything or x-rays that turn your cells green? Fuck that shit.[/quote]



That's what happens. And if you don't pay they garnish your checks.
the dead vote well wrote:
18 Jun 2021, 04:22
moving from a garbage disposal back to the dumpster but it’s an improvement nonetheless
User avatar
Lavabug
Metal God
Posts: 7659
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 16:15
Location: An ocean of filth.

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Lavabug »

[quote name="Lerzeig Redek"]I got laid off from work and lost my insurance that I had through my job. Now I sure as shit can't afford health insurance on my own. What are people like me supposed to do in the event of sudden crippling illness or dismemberment? Go to the hospital anyway? And spend the next 10-20 years paying for some retarded MRI scans that don't find anything or x-rays that turn your cells green? Fuck that shit.[/quote]

How dare you question commercialized health!! What are you, some kind of unamerican pinko?
Noyka
Ancient One
Posts: 4744
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 08:16
Location: California

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Noyka »

[quote name="Lerzeig Redek"]I got laid off from work and lost my insurance that I had through my job. Now I sure as shit can't afford health insurance on my own. What are people like me supposed to do in the event of sudden crippling illness or dismemberment? Go to the hospital anyway? And spend the next 10-20 years paying for some retarded MRI scans that don't find anything or x-rays that turn your cells green? Fuck that shit.[/quote]



For people like you there should be tax rebates to help you pay for health insurance, we don't need a public option outside of medicad/medicare. Also businesses should get tax rebates and what not to help pay for insurance. We do not need to place our lives in the hands of the government. Bureaucrats don't have the right to decide who lives and who dies.



The other thing, why create overall mediocrity? I agree our system has some major flaws, malpractice being a big culprit but why wreck what 75% of the nation is happy with? Most of the so called uninsured choose to be uninsured or are illegal aliens so the numbers aren't exactly honest. I have sympathy for people like you and I agree there needs to be an option but there are ways to do this without the government that in the long run will be better for everyone. In the US people have access to some of the most advanced medicines and procedures out there, to socialize medicine would be to take the possibility of advancement away because everything would be geared towards cutting costs and allowing all to be covered. To put it simply, in a socialized system we're all just numbers we're all just money wasted so why do we want to go there?
User avatar
Abzu
Postwhore
Posts: 45528
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 08:35
Location: next door

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Abzu »

There needs to be an option for people who cannot get insurance otherwise. There are 50 million uninsured, which is an inexcusable situation.



Nowhere in the bill does anyone decide who lives or dies. Stop this bullshit. Go read it. Show me where it says that. Its crap.
ANGEL OF DESEASE wrote:the path of whoring is something wicked and grim, and very philosophical.
;,,;
droidspawn
I'd Rank That For $1
Posts: 49267
Joined: 14 Apr 2009, 06:40
Location: to the depths, in degradation

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by droidspawn »

I havent had any sort sort of health insurance for like 4 years, and I've had two collapsed lungs that could go again anytime, it's fucking awesome I tell you! It's way too expensive to get any kind of private insurance. The cheapest plan I've found is $350/month, thats almost as much as my rent, FUCK THAT. Private insurers can burn in hell, that's right Noyka, they can! "Tax rebates" won't do jack shit, they don't really help you at all.
User avatar
jawn galliano
Yahtzee Genius
Posts: 23241
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 04:24

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by jawn galliano »

SOCIALIST DEATH PANELS



much worse than corporatist death panels, because SOCIALISM
Noyka
Ancient One
Posts: 4744
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 08:16
Location: California

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Noyka »

[quote name="abzu"]There needs to be an option for people who cannot get insurance otherwise. There are 50 million uninsured, which is an inexcusable situation.



Nowhere in the bill does anyone decide who lives or dies. Stop this bullshit. Go read it. Show me where it says that. Its crap.[/quote]





I have read it, they decide what gets covered and what doesn't therefore they decide who lives and who dies. My question is, why are we not learning from other countries that have this already? Something isn't directly said doesn't mean what's in place won't lead to it. It's happened in EVERY other country that has this.



50 million is a bullshit number. A lot of those people choose to be uninsured and another 7 million, possibly more, are illegal aliens. Stop flaunting inflated numbers around and stop letting the media think for you. It seems to be all people do, they want to go with what seems to be the easiest thing when in the end it will lead to pain for all of us. Not to mention the inflated cost because of all the unneccessary Bureaucracy thrown in there. Rationing will happen, that's a fact, no country has been able to or will be able to sustain a "universal" healthcare program through the government.



That said, we have something for those who can't get uninsured, medicad and for seniors we have medicare. We should work on these programs before expanding them considering they, like every other government program are broken. Most importantly we should do tort reform, this would save billions in unneccessary tests and litigation.



I just don't understand all this pro big government thought going on here, I mean it's worked no where else logically it isn't going to work here either.





http://www.thomas.gov - H.R. 3200





OMG INSURANCE COMPANIES DECIDE IF WE LIVE OR DIE!!!1!111111111



You obviously don't understand jack, in the free market you can go to another doctor or another clinic or another whatever to choose where to get your coverage in a universal healthcare you can't do that, you're stuck. We have the power and some of us are choosing to lay down and allow these guys to take that power away. Can't afford it? You can still get taken care of at ERs and tax payers pay for it, we do for illegals.



Make fun of me all you want, my opinion and my fears are 100% valid. Based on what's going on in other countries and what I've seen in the US thus far.



jorsh, you'll pay for it through your taxes trust me nothing is free. In the UK taxes are at 60% for some. 350 might very well be chump change compared to what we all pay for this, I'm not sure though.





Anyone remember Hawaii's uni healthcare for children? People abused it and it ended in 7 months. Also several states have have universal healthcare plans and many of the fears people have are coming true, they're not as off base as you guys seem to want to believe.
User avatar
Abzu
Postwhore
Posts: 45528
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 08:35
Location: next door

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Abzu »

Show me the supposed line where it says someone will not be covered for something wherein they can live or die. Show me.



I'm not pro big government, but I am pro health coverage. Do you have a better idea for covering the 50 million not covered?
ANGEL OF DESEASE wrote:the path of whoring is something wicked and grim, and very philosophical.
;,,;
User avatar
Abzu
Postwhore
Posts: 45528
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 08:35
Location: next door

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Abzu »

I think for myself, thanks. Do not insult me in such a manner. 50 million, 7 million even just 1 million... too many to be without coverage. If someone doesnt want coverage then fine, they should be able to opt out. Illegal aliens deserve nothing less than deportation. But the legal citizens who want coverage but do not have coverage fucking deserve coverage. Like I said above, if you have a better way to get them coverage, feel free to share it.
ANGEL OF DESEASE wrote:the path of whoring is something wicked and grim, and very philosophical.
;,,;
User avatar
Abzu
Postwhore
Posts: 45528
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 08:35
Location: next door

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Abzu »

Excuse me for triple posting rather than including this all in one post.





Medicaid isnt a catch all. The people in question are those that fall through the cracks of it. I have medicaid and its alright. There are people who arent caught by medicaid and cant afford other coverage... a lot of people. What about them?
ANGEL OF DESEASE wrote:the path of whoring is something wicked and grim, and very philosophical.
;,,;
droidspawn
I'd Rank That For $1
Posts: 49267
Joined: 14 Apr 2009, 06:40
Location: to the depths, in degradation

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by droidspawn »

I agree 100%, who cares if it's 1 million or 50 million uninsured, the point is that it is absolutely unacceptable. In cases such as mine, I very much want/need insurance but I cant afford it. I'm not some idiot who thinks he's invincible. We should be ashamed of ourselves for letting _______ people go uninsured. I think if you are willing and ABLE to pay for it, you should have the best coverage available.
Noyka
Ancient One
Posts: 4744
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 08:16
Location: California

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Noyka »

[quote name="abzu"]Show me the supposed line where it says someone will not be covered for something wherein they can live or die. Show me.



I'm not pro big government, but I am pro health coverage. Do you have a better idea for covering the 50 million not covered?[/quote]



It directly says if your health insurance changes you'll be forced to change and if you can't you'll be dumped in the public option this means eventually 300 million will be in a public system, minus congress and government officials who are excluded of course. This means that the government pays for everyone. How can we afford that? We cannot, there's no way any country can afford that kind of coverage. Therefore rationing will set in, who decides what and who gets rationed? Washington, that's who.





Where do I get this?



All through Part VII of the bill there are new requirements in taxes on employers and others for health insurance related taxes and penalties for not following. This means government organizations have to be created to fulfill this it's logic.



Government approved healthcare is what everyone has to be on, logically there are going to be organizations set up to decide what's approved and what's not. This is logic based on the very PREMISES of the bill. I don't have time to go through all 1000 pages and pick out ever line, that proves me right, I don't think anyone does. But I have read the bill, the language used makes it where a lot can be read between the lines this is going to lead to definite abuse. That's not good legislation, I don't know how anyone can support this particular bill.





Nobody has addressed Tort reform, why not start with this?
User avatar
Haunty
Metal God
Posts: 12225
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 01:28
Location: using Thibault to cancel out Capo Ferro

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Haunty »

SARD
Image



Need a new signature? Why not Zoidberg? (V) (;,,;) (V)
Noyka
Ancient One
Posts: 4744
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 08:16
Location: California

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Noyka »

There's something else I forgot to address, why are we not modeling ourselves after Scandanavia or Switzerland where the government regulates cost but allows private insurance to continue? Every one of their citizens is covered at a fair cost. Why do we need a huge amount of bureauocracy and a huge amount of government? I mean if this passes government will make up 47% of our economy which will make the US a socialist nation.
User avatar
Abzu
Postwhore
Posts: 45528
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 08:35
Location: next door

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Abzu »

[quote name="Noyka"]
[quote name="abzu"]Show me the supposed line where it says someone will not be covered for something wherein they can live or die. Show me.



I'm not pro big government, but I am pro health coverage. Do you have a better idea for covering the 50 million not covered?[/quote]



It directly says if your health insurance changes you'll be forced to change and if you can't you'll be dumped in the public option this means eventually 300 million will be in a public system, minus congress and government officials who are excluded of course. This means that the government pays for everyone. How can we afford that? We cannot, there's no way any country can afford that kind of coverage. Therefore rationing will set in, who decides what and who gets rationed? Washington, that's who.





Where do I get this?



All through Part VII of the bill there are new requirements in taxes on employers and others for health insurance related taxes and penalties for not following. This means government organizations have to be created to fulfill this it's logic.



Government approved healthcare is what everyone has to be on, logically there are going to be organizations set up to decide what's approved and what's not. This is logic based on the very PREMISES of the bill. I don't have time to go through all 1000 pages and pick out ever line, that proves me right, I don't think anyone does. But I have read the bill, the language used makes it where a lot can be read between the lines this is going to lead to definite abuse. That's not good legislation, I don't know how anyone can support this particular bill.





Nobody has addressed Tort reform, why not start with this?[/quote]

I didn't ask where it says you can't opt out. I asked where it says someone will not be treated and thus deemed to live or die. To paraphrase a bard meme, Quotes or it didn't happen. I've read the whole damn thing and no where by any logical interpretation of the language does it say that.



Also, you did not address how the millions uninsured can be covered any other way.
ANGEL OF DESEASE wrote:the path of whoring is something wicked and grim, and very philosophical.
;,,;
User avatar
Abzu
Postwhore
Posts: 45528
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 08:35
Location: next door

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Abzu »

[quote name="Noyka"]There's something else I forgot to address, why are we not modeling ourselves after Scandanavia or Switzerland where the government regulates cost but allows private insurance to continue? Every one of their citizens is covered at a fair cost. Why do we need a huge amount of bureauocracy and a huge amount of government? I mean if this passes government will make up 47% of our economy which will make the US a socialist nation.[/quote]

I wouldnt be against this..



Ironic though, considering the far right tends to call them socialist nations.
ANGEL OF DESEASE wrote:the path of whoring is something wicked and grim, and very philosophical.
;,,;
User avatar
jawn galliano
Yahtzee Genius
Posts: 23241
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 04:24

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by jawn galliano »

noyka-



please stop using the word socialism. i don't think it means what you think it means. it is apparently the new fascism, e.g., anything you don't like, for whatever reason.



what's the inherent problem with socialization of certain services? do you support the privatization of highway construction/maintenance/operation, local/state/interstate law enforcement, firefighting, and basic scientific research, to name a few?
Noyka
Ancient One
Posts: 4744
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 08:16
Location: California

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Noyka »

[quote name="Famous Mortimer"]noyka-



please stop using the word socialism. i don't think it means what you think it means. it is apparently the new fascism, e.g., anything you don't like, for whatever reason.



what's the inherent problem with socialization of certain services? do you support the privatization of highway construction/maintenance/operation, local/state/interstate law enforcement, firefighting, and basic scientific research, to name a few?[/quote]



Socialism:



1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state



Healthcare taken by the government means 47% of our nation's economy will be government run I.E. We will be by definition socialist



Stop thinking I'm uneducated....in short get over yourself.



Yeah, governmentization of highway construction, have you seen our roads they're pretty bad. Scientific research, the best have been non-government funded. Also what's better fedex or the postal service? Stop, think, repeat seriously.



Also, Abzu I read the whole thing too and I told you with all the REGULATIONS PUT IN PLACE by the bill. There are going to be boards set up that decide what's what. I'm not stupid, it's happened everywhere else I'm simply using logic. Something some in this thread (not you) seem to lack.





Also, I'm not a conservative I'm a Jeffersonian Libertarian there's a big difference. I just happen to agree with Conservatives on this issue.
User avatar
Charles Bronson
God of Emptiness
Posts: 618
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 07:25

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Charles Bronson »

[quote name="Skinfection"]i havent had insurance since i was 18[/quote]

I'm uninsured once I graduate (dads insurance).
Noyka
Ancient One
Posts: 4744
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 08:16
Location: California

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Noyka »

[quote name="abzu"]
[quote name="Noyka"]There's something else I forgot to address, why are we not modeling ourselves after Scandanavia or Switzerland where the government regulates cost but allows private insurance to continue? Every one of their citizens is covered at a fair cost. Why do we need a huge amount of bureauocracy and a huge amount of government? I mean if this passes government will make up 47% of our economy which will make the US a socialist nation.[/quote]

I wouldnt be against this..



Ironic though, considering the far right tends to call them socialist nations.[/quote]



I'm not "the far right" I'm an independant, Jeffersonian Libertarian. I just happen to agree fiscally with the right in a lot of instances.



Please don't make assumptions unless you talk to me everyday about issues :santa:



I do appologize for going off on you earlier, all you're doing is questioning me which is fine. I get very emotionally over this issue in particular because my brother will be one of the "not important" people who will be denied services if things go the way I think they will. I'd be in favor of a bill that takes on Tort reform and allows regulations of prices but the private market to continue. We also should give tax breaks to private businesses that provide health insurance to their employers. Not increase their taxes as stated in Section VII of the bill on them if their plan isn't government approved.
User avatar
Lavabug
Metal God
Posts: 7659
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 16:15
Location: An ocean of filth.

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Lavabug »

[quote name="Noyka"]
[quote name="Famous Mortimer"]noyka-



please stop using the word socialism. i don't think it means what you think it means. it is apparently the new fascism, e.g., anything you don't like, for whatever reason.



what's the inherent problem with socialization of certain services? do you support the privatization of highway construction/maintenance/operation, local/state/interstate law enforcement, firefighting, and basic scientific research, to name a few?[/quote]



Socialism:



1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are fondled and controlled by the state[/quote]

How do these definitions establish a preset % of how much of a country's economy is to be nationalized in order to qualify as a socialist nation?



Does the American labor force own and control the means of production? Do people working for an automobile company or any nationwide franchise get to decide how much the product sells for and how much of it is produced?
Noyka
Ancient One
Posts: 4744
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 08:16
Location: California

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Noyka »

I don't know the exact numbers but usually around 50% is considered socialist, I mean Germany who is considred democratic socialist their economy is 46% government run.



47% seems to me to put America in socialism, democratic socialism.



The government does get to decide the price, companies that are government owned will survive without making a profit. If they lower their prices and cause a deficit, other companies will be taxes causing prices to go up. I'm not an economic expert I just know what's happened before.
User avatar
Abzu
Postwhore
Posts: 45528
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 08:35
Location: next door

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Abzu »

[quote name="Noyka"]I'm not "the far right" I'm an independant, Jeffersonian Libertarian. I just happen to agree fiscally with the right in a lot of instances.



Please don't make assumptions unless you talk to me everyday about issues :santa:



I do appologize for going off on you earlier, all you're doing is questioning me which is fine. I get very emotionally over this issue in particular because my brother will be one of the "not important" people who will be denied services if things go the way I think they will. I'd be in favor of a bill that takes on Tort reform and allows regulations of prices but the private market to continue. We also should give tax breaks to private businesses that provide health insurance to their employers. Not increase their taxes as stated in Section VII of the bill on them if their plan isn't government approved.[/quote]

Nowhere did I say you were the far right. I was just pointing out silly irony. I sometimes find myself agreeing with the far right as well, mostly in the realm of gun control.



This would allow the private market to continue. I hate to paraphrase Obama, but look at the USPS vs. Fed Ex, DHL and UPS as you previously mentioned. None of those companies are in danger of being squashed out. Now, before you make assumptions on me, Im going to state on bard record that, while I voted for Obama, that does not mean I agree with 100% of what he says or stands for. I simply agreed with him more than Palin (who, lets face it, would have succeeded McCain a month in tops after one solid cardiac arrest causing blowjob in AirForceOne)... you know its sad really, on a serious note. I like McCain. Until Palin came on board, I was on the fence as to who to vote for. Anyway, Im going off point. What I'm saying here is Im neither a righty nor leftist. Im not partisan. Im no fanboy for anyone on either side or int he middle. I have my own collection of ideals and, when a candidate holds (or proclaims to and for all intents and purposes seems to hold) a bigger portion of those than another, I know where to swing my vote.



HR 3200 is far from perfect. It needs work on funding and where it intends to trim the fat, so to speak. Perhaps it may even need some gay man's telescope caulk around the panes to make sure NO ONE seeps through the cracks. It is, however, the best current option moving in the house. (By the way, S 604 and HR 1207 are absolutely fucking necessary, people.) Until a private company jumps up and says "Hey, we will insure people who cant afford it and not reject them for any health reasons prior or gained after coverage," we need a public option to scoop up the people who slip between private and medicaid/medicare. The uncovered people need to be taken care of. It does not, however, contain death panels. It will not destroy the US. It is not making us a Communist nation. We may take on a bit of socialist definition in the process, but that's ok in this instance. We dont need bigger federal government by way of regulation, but those uninsured who want but cannot get coverage need to be provided the care they deserve as citizen of the US. If a better bill is introduced, I will root for it instead.



We really need to start pushing personal responsibility, not as law but as obvious choice, and teach wellness and preventions. Health coverage public and private needs to start covering prevention and wellness.



I understand your concern with your brother. However, one of the main points of this bill is that no one will be refused coverage on the grounds that they have a pre-existing condition. Maybe your concern is rooted more in specific treatments that you fear would be denied under this plan? I need to go skim through on that point, but I do not recall a line stating that a necessary treatment will be denied a patient. If you know of the line or section, please point me there to save me some time. (It is one massive piece of legislation, I agree.)



If you really want to get me going, ma'am, rant about the piece of shit Federal Reserve. That cockoperation angers me. I really disagree with Obama's appointment of that ratshit Geithner as Sec. Treasury. Chances are, this health care reform is one of the few political topics you will see you and I partially disagree on.
ANGEL OF DESEASE wrote:the path of whoring is something wicked and grim, and very philosophical.
;,,;
Noyka
Ancient One
Posts: 4744
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 08:16
Location: California

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Noyka »

Abzu, most fair minded people are 100% against the idea of our monetary system being controlled by a PRIVATE organization. In every other instance I support private > government but our dollars really need some regulation and the fed needs major auditing and oversight. An auditing bill was recently shot down by congress. Also maybe a private panel should overlook the government so we don't have massive abuse like we've recently seen. Printing a random trillion whenever the government needs it? That can't be right.



I'm afraid that if my brother has say heart problems (common with children who have down syndrome) if rationing occurs he will get denied service. Why? Because he has down syndrome, heart issues are a risk factor expected and he will never be a usable citizen so to speak therefore the money should be allocated to someone else.



Obama's words sound nice, Obama may even have good intentions but we really need to think this through and we need a extremely clear and limited public option if there's gonna be a public option. I don't know what the right answer is but I do agree having those uninsured because they can't afford it isn't acceptable. I realize I come across as someone who "LOL HATES OBAMA" I don't hate him, I disagree with him on just about every policy but I am no loon.





I want to say set up more free clinics but we all know how those turn out.
User avatar
jawn galliano
Yahtzee Genius
Posts: 23241
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 04:24

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by jawn galliano »

i was gonna respond again but between lavabug and the vermonter i think all of my rebuttals have already been covered adequately



there is some bizarre mabb-mind-meld thing going on here or something
Noyka
Ancient One
Posts: 4744
Joined: 16 Apr 2009, 08:16
Location: California

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Noyka »

Also, lol Own.ed = owned
User avatar
Abzu
Postwhore
Posts: 45528
Joined: 17 Apr 2009, 08:35
Location: next door

Re: Study Demonstrates How We Support Our False Beliefs

Post by Abzu »

[quote name="Noyka"]Abzu, most fair minded people are 100% against the idea of our monetary system being controlled by a PRIVATE organization. In every other instance I support private > government but our dollars really need some regulation and the fed needs major auditing and oversight. An auditing bill was recently shot down by congress. Also maybe a private panel should overlook the government so we don't have massive abuse like we've recently seen. Printing a random trillion whenever the government needs it? That can't be right.



I'm afraid that if my brother has say heart problems (common with children who have down syndrome) if rationing occurs he will get denied service. Why? Because he has down syndrome, heart issues are a risk factor expected and he will never be a usable citizen so to speak therefore the money should be allocated to someone else.



Obama's words sound nice, Obama may even have good intentions but we really need to think this through and we need a extremely clear and limited public option if there's gonna be a public option. I don't know what the right answer is but I do agree having those uninsured because they can't afford it isn't acceptable. I realize I come across as someone who "LOL HATES OBAMA" I don't hate him, I disagree with him on just about every policy but I am no loon.





I want to say set up more free clinics but we all know how those turn out.[/quote]



Well put.



http://auditthefed.com
ANGEL OF DESEASE wrote:the path of whoring is something wicked and grim, and very philosophical.
;,,;
Post Reply