Statistician Nate Silver from 538 analyzes several polls on the public option for healthcare reform

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: Paddington
The figure they cited was $1.6 trillion to cover 1/3 of those currently uninsured. The "currently uninsured" numbers are highly dubious, but using the most generous "45 million" estimate, that means 15 million people. So $160 billion a year to cover 15 million people, works out to over $10,000 *per person* cost to the taxpayer at large. That's far too costly, and the plan should be rejected.

So 1000 a yr per person.

$1000 a year is a significant cost. You casually dismiss $300 billion as if it were nothing. This is money the government doesn't even have right now. $1000 per head is about 5% of GDP. Is America ready to whack 5% off its GDP to expand health insurance when it can't afford to do so?

We don't really have enough facts for me to want to jump too deep in the realm on how this bill will turn out. Personally I think it is wishy washy and want a full coverage plan with good breakdowns of where the money is to be spent.

I *believe* the initial costs should be highest in setting things up and costs should hopefully fall to around 500 a year as time goes on for insuring EVERY AMERICAN.

I mean the numbers quoted don't even taken into account the savings we experience over not having to use as much emergent care or increased economies of scale, etc...

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: TruePaige
If 100B a year would insure 1/3, then 300B a year could insure everyone.

So 1000 a yr per person.

So 83 a month.
20 a week
2.97 a day.

For $2.97 a day we can insure all of America. Go for a true nationalized system instead of playing nice with these lobbyist insurance company people who perpetuate the "status quo" and I know we could get that much lower.

$2.97 a day to take care of every uninsured American in this nation. Sounds pretty good.

Since Medicaid alone costs 320 billion a year already, that's a pretty neat trick. Add the rest of the country and the price drops by 20 billion annually.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: TruePaige
If 100B a year would insure 1/3, then 300B a year could insure everyone.

So 1000 a yr per person.

So 83 a month.
20 a week
2.97 a day.

For $2.97 a day we can insure all of America. Go for a true nationalized system instead of playing nice with these lobbyist insurance company people who perpetuate the "status quo" and I know we could get that much lower.

$2.97 a day to take care of every uninsured American in this nation. Sounds pretty good.

That is $300 billion (actually $480 b) to cover only 50 million people. That means covering the WHOLE country would cost us 6 times that amount or $2.8 trillion!!!!

Our entire budget for 2008 pre TARP was only $3 trillion.

Now we do already pay about $1 trillion a year via the Federal government. So we are only $1.8 trillion away from providing all Americans with healthcare. (at the cost of this plan which of course won't actually work when expanded to cover all Americans)

Coming up with $1.8 trillion would would require us to raise all federally paid taxes in this country by more than 50%

Pull out your last paycheck and increase 'Federal income tax" by 50% and then deduct whatever your health insurance premium is and tell us if you come out ahead. For me... I would end up with perhaps $75 less per paycheck, not an insignificant amount.

I don't know if you knew this or not Pro-Jo, but we already spend 2.5 trillion a year WITHOUT covering these people.

Now look at the next car you buy. Go ahead and chop a good chunk off the price of that car because Honda or Ford or whoever is no longer having to pay for health care for their workers. This gets to the root of the insanely dishonest argument that the ultra right is using: that your taxes are somehow going way up. You are already being taxed for this health care, just in a different way.

 

[ProfJohn]

Paige... get a clue and stop thinking with your heart.

Total spending for healthcare in 2007 was $2.4 trillion or $7900 per American.

If we set up a government healthcare system it will cost at least that amount, most likely more.

The idea that we can spend $1000 per year is just plain stupid.

BTW re-do your math. $160 billion per year for 15 million people works out to $10,000 per person, not $1000.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: TruePaige
Go for a true nationalized system instead of playing nice with these lobbyist insurance company people who perpetuate the "status quo"

:laugh: Go look at all the money Hillary received in campaign donations from health care companies.

Yes? And?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Paige... get a clue and stop thinking with your heart.

Total spending for healthcare in 2007 was $2.4 trillion or $7900 per American.

If we set up a government healthcare system it will cost at least that amount, most likely more.

The idea that we can spend $1000 per year is just plain stupid.

BTW re-do your math. $160 billion per year for 15 million people works out to $10,000 per person, not $1000.

What possible information are you basing your idea that government health care must necessarily cost more than private? Medicare's overhead is already less than the private industry's. Also, every place on the planet where national health care has been put into place, it is cheaper than it is here. Everywhere you look, government run health care beats the everloving shit out of our private system. I mean... utterly destroys it. Our system is a national disgrace, the only problem with Obama's plan is that it doesn't completely eliminate what we have now.

Basically Pro-Jo, you need to start thinking. All you're doing is parroting ultra-right talking points and not engaging your brain.

 

[BarrySotero]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Read my post again... my whole point was that people have no idea what they are voting for in these polls.

"Free healthcare" sounds great until you get the bill or understand how much taxes have to go up to pay for it.

Indeed, Obama lies SO freekin much (oh "you will be able to keep your present plan" NOT!) that the average American dummy doesn't even know what Obama's plans mean (keep in mind only like 22% knew "cap and trade" was about environment).

Americans don't want to subsidize illegals and many of them don't realize that's exactly what Obama wants to do.

"Americans Support Universal Health Coverage, But Not If It Covers Illegal Immigrants"

Friday, June 12, 2009

Eighty percent (80%) of U.S. voters oppose providing government health care coverage for illegal immigrants as part of the health care reform package that is working its way through Congress.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 11% disagree and think coverage for illegals is a good idea.

Most voters also oppose making health insurance mandatory for all Americans. "



http://www.rasmussenreports.co...ers_illegal_immigrants

 

[ProfJohn]

Healthcare is cheaper every place else in the world because they ration care. That is the only way for them to control costs.

Also... by most measures I have seen we have the best quality healthcare in the world. (cancer survival rates are highest, wait times for services are low etc) Our problem is that not everyone has access to that quality healthcare, thus we have this endless debate about what to do.

Personally I think we should be looking at France and copying their system and set up a two tiered system of private and public healthcare. Everyone has access to public healthcare, but that care would be greatly limited and require wait periods etc. Above that we have private health insurance that would provide better care and better services.

The problem I see now is that the liberals in Washington are pushing us towards a government run system and that will turnout to be a disaster.

 

[OCGuy]

lol @ polling people if they want free government cheese, when they have no idea what the rammifications will be.



NBC Poll: Do you think the the US Government should give everyone a 2010 Lambo?*




Yes: 82

No: 18



The polls show Americans are not for Gay rights. Do you think we should give them what they want?



* not a real poll

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Paige... get a clue and stop thinking with your heart.

Total spending for healthcare in 2007 was $2.4 trillion or $7900 per American.

If we set up a government healthcare system it will cost at least that amount, most likely more.

The idea that we can spend $1000 per year is just plain stupid.

BTW re-do your math. $160 billion per year for 15 million people works out to $10,000 per person, not $1000.

What possible information are you basing your idea that government health care must necessarily cost more than private? Medicare's overhead is already less than the private industry's. Also, every place on the planet where national health care has been put into place, it is cheaper than it is here. Everywhere you look, government run health care beats the everloving shit out of our private system. I mean... utterly destroys it. Our system is a national disgrace, the only problem with Obama's plan is that it doesn't completely eliminate what we have now.

Basically Pro-Jo, you need to start thinking. All you're doing is parroting ultra-right talking points and not engaging your brain.

Government health care is to the left as Iraq was to the right. Both have an unwavering belief that the government has the solution, yet neither really have/had a clue what that meant.

Great. Germany has a UHC. Switzerland does too. Nations fought noble wars for noble purposes over the ages. If they did it, then the US certainly will make sure that Iraq is just the same. That turned out well, didn't it?

Zealots always have the answer, and they want it implemented now.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: TruePaige
Go for a true nationalized system instead of playing nice with these lobbyist insurance company people who perpetuate the "status quo"

:laugh: Go look at all the money Hillary received in campaign donations from health care companies.

Yes? And?

Well they weren't giving her money knowing she'd "perpetuate the "status quo."

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: Paddington
$1000 per head is about 5% of GDP. Is America ready to whack 5% off its GDP to expand health insurance when it can't afford to do so?

that money would go right back into the economy.

 

[Mani]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
85% of Americans also want sharks with laser beams on their friggan heads in the oceans as well.

I personally prefer an evil petting zoo.

 

[themusgrat]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
1. Do you support President Obama's plan to expand healthcare to millions of uninsured?

or

2. Do you support a plan to spend $100 billion a year in order to provide healthcare to only a third of the countries uninsured?

Question 1 gets huge approval, question 2 gets laughed at.

Yeap, and your question is still incredibly dishonestly phrased. That's why you would be laughed out of a real polling firm.

Actually it's really not that far off. The only unfair thing is how much money we'll be spending to not even cover everyone.....

The polls originally quoted are fine, but all they mean is that people would like to see a social system that competes with our current system, or even is on par with.

When asked ""In any health care proposal, how important do you feel it is to give people a choice of both a public plan administered by the federal government and a private plan for their health insurance??extremely important, quite important, not that important, or not at all important?"

76% extremely/quite important
20% not that/not at all important

So obviously most Americans don't really want to completely do away with the health care system we have now, they lean more towards making sure everyone is covered, but still being able to opt into private health care.

The 1 poll that had the most people say yes was:

"Creating a new public health insurance plan that anyone can purchase."

83% supported, 14% opposed.



Don't you see? The polls are not at all clear that they're supporting what the OP is saying. All the polls really say is that people want everyone to be covered. That's it.

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: Phokus
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com...for-public-option.html

He does a very in depth several polls and ranks them based on how partisan the question/answers are, how well the question was worded, sample size, etc.

The two most trustworthy polls KFF and the NBC/WSJ poll show a 65%, 68%, and 76% (KFF had 2 separate questions that resulted in the 65/68 split).

I don't think there should be anymore debate about what the American people actually want, based on this data, it's quite obvious that the overwhelming majority of Americans WANT the public option.

I'm all for the public option but as long as I don't have to subsidize others.

You subsidize others now. You're just not told about it. That's what insurance is.

 

[BoberFett]

Phokus.txt

 

[Fingolfin269]

Does anyone know if demographic information is available with any of the polls referenced in the OP? I'm mainly concerned with items such as income level, employment status (unemployed/self-employed/employed by some entity), etc.

I just think it would be interesting to see how the voting breaks out there. Of course with these polls I think people will answer with their heart until actual ramifications are put on the table for them to review. That is when you will get your true answer. Is a person who voted yes for a public HC option going to vote yes if they figure out it will cost them $X more per month? I suppose we will find out soon enough.

 

[Carmen813]

How many people commenting that the polls are irrelevant actually went to the OPs link and read Nate's analysis?

As for those bitching about illegal immigrants you already subsidize their health care. Hospitals are legally required to treat any person who shoes up in an emergency room regardless of their ability to pay. So until you are willing to say that you are okay with hospitals turning illegal immigrants back onto the street and letting them die, shutup.

The whole point of insurance is to subsidize others. That is what insurance is!

 

[Slew Foot]

Most people will say yes to anything, until they realize they have to pay for it.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Most people will say yes to anything, until they realize they have to pay for it.

Must be how the insurance companies continue their racket..

Oh wait, no, that is because Politicians cater to the almighty dollar far too often. It is time to turn the scales back to balanced and give us all universal health care.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: Phokus
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com...for-public-option.html

He does a very in depth several polls and ranks them based on how partisan the question/answers are, how well the question was worded, sample size, etc.

The two most trustworthy polls KFF and the NBC/WSJ poll show a 65%, 68%, and 76% (KFF had 2 separate questions that resulted in the 65/68 split).

I don't think there should be anymore debate about what the American people actually want, based on this data, it's quite obvious that the overwhelming majority of Americans WANT the public option.

I'm all for the public option but as long as I don't have to subsidize others.

You are subsidizing others, you just don't know it. When hospitals admit people without insurance who can't pay, they just pass those costs back to us.

 

[Hacp]

A public option can mean different things. People could be thinking of model government programs like the USPS, which doesn't request any tax dollars from the government. If the government comes up with a plan that does not use tax money to insure people, then thats fine with me. However, the moment one cent of taxpayer money is used to give illegals free health insurance, people will riot.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: Phokus
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com...for-public-option.html

He does a very in depth several polls and ranks them based on how partisan the question/answers are, how well the question was worded, sample size, etc.

The two most trustworthy polls KFF and the NBC/WSJ poll show a 65%, 68%, and 76% (KFF had 2 separate questions that resulted in the 65/68 split).

I don't think there should be anymore debate about what the American people actually want, based on this data, it's quite obvious that the overwhelming majority of Americans WANT the public option.

I'm all for the public option but as long as I don't have to subsidize others.

You are subsidizing others, you just don't know it. When hospitals admit people without insurance who can't pay, they just pass those costs back to us.

Thats why we need to get rid of those stupid laws. If they can't pay, they should be thrown out in the street.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: brandonbull

Originally posted by: Phokus
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com...for-public-option.html

He does a very in depth several polls and ranks them based on how partisan the question/answers are, how well the question was worded, sample size, etc.

The two most trustworthy polls KFF and the NBC/WSJ poll show a 65%, 68%, and 76% (KFF had 2 separate questions that resulted in the 65/68 split).

I don't think there should be anymore debate about what the American people actually want, based on this data, it's quite obvious that the overwhelming majority of Americans WANT the public option.

I'm all for the public option but as long as I don't have to subsidize others.

You are subsidizing others, you just don't know it. When hospitals admit people without insurance who can't pay, they just pass those costs back to us.

Thats why we need to get rid of those stupid laws. If they can't pay, they should be thrown out in the street.

Should we just give you a gun and then you can shoot them too?

Troll.

 

[MotF Bane]

The majority of Americans didn't want bank bailouts, but the wants of the people were ignored. When it suits your views, now the wants of the people should be listened to?