Well, given that I was tested by a doctor, yes I would say empirically that is the case. I literally went to a psychologist and had my IQ tested. The purpose was to build a baseline for other things we are trying to measure, but in that test was verbal comprehension. So if you want to attack me on that, go ahead, but you are going against a lot of work done by people far more adept at this topic.
While I certainly wouldn’t want to impugn the results of your testing I was simply noting that you are repeatedly running in to significant comprehension issues about pretty basic stuff across multiple threads and multiple people. Of course it’s always possible that you’ve just happened to run into a few particularly inarticulate people, I guess, haha.
What I said was this...
Well keep in mind our healthcare is not the same as their health care. We do many things they do not.
We also do many other things, but what I gave was one example of things we do in the US healthcare system that are not usually done in other countries. So when I saw him post his chart of healthcare costs, I responded with the fact that the US does many things other countries do not do. I never said anything beyond that the US system does things that outhers do not. I did not defend the US system, nor would I. I can show examples of times when I said the US system is quite broken. But, to just show a graph saying that the US system costs more does not really tell much of the story.
I did not talk about table 2, as its just saying that we have less doctors and beds ect. That effectively drives up the cost which is also another issue that the US system has. Our system for the same procedures tends to cost more. I did not bring it up, but I was the one that linked the damn document. I'm not avoiding anything, but I did not have the time to go into every last damn detail about the US healthcare system. I simply wanted BS to realize that just posting a graph does little to explain anything when you dont have the context.
I pulled nothing out of my ass, as the only claim that I have made is that the US system does many things other systems do not typically do. That is backed by facts. This is a damn tech forum that I sometimes visit to have discussions. This is nothing more than a hobby, so if I dont devote hours to this thing every day, its not indicative of anything beyond that I prioritize my life.
Why does that matter? Only thing that matters is results, and US gets worse results for more money. So if we do more then that means we should stop doing those things. "US is different" is not an argument. That only means we should be more like them, since they do better. If someone does something better than you then you copy them. You'd think the "businessman in chief" would understand such a basic concept.. You don't double down on the model that has been giving worse results for money for decades, that's certifiably idiotic.
Well, to be fair, that group is outweighed (subjective) by others that agree with me. As I said, those others were fairly diverse and universally came to the same conclusion I have come to without knowing the authors of either side. Not proof of right or wrong, but a far better argument than nothing. That group has now expanded beyond work and into my private life was well. So, I have literally everyone outside of this forum, friends or not, that agree with me. Or a handful of people on a tech forum that do not. I'm sure you will say my methods were at fault, but literally printing out our discussion and given the label person a person b seems pretty solid to me.
This would be a pretty good example of the same thing we are discussing. You’ve personally run a test that is achieving 180 degree opposite results of what happened in the actual conversation. A logical person would conclude you’re most likely screwing the test up somehow, most likely due to selective curation of what you had people read.
I would suggest to you that considering you run into the same problem on here over and over again that you may want to ask yourself why this happens to you so much more than anyone else.
So the error must be on my side, and not on the side of the people here? If anything, I would think that 3rd parties would be less biased.
What I did was the following.
Post # 109 A
Post # 121 B
Post # 123 A
Post # 124 B
Post # 126 A
Post # 131 B
Post # 143 A
Post # 145 B
I felt that was the foundation of what was the discussion.
So you ended your sample with a post that purposefully misstated one of the arguments and falsely framed it as fallacious. No wonder you got those results, you curated the 'experiment' to basically ensure them. This is either complete incompetence on your part or more willful misrepresentation. Like I said, when you run an experiment that just so happens to give you results that run 180 degrees from your actual experience this should probably give you pause. Instead you took it as validation, haha.
So once again, you may want to take a minute and consider why you so consistently run into this sort of problem when almost no one else does. Why do you think that is?
So you ended your sample with a post that purposefully misstated one of the arguments and falsely framed it as fallacious. No wonder you got those results, you curated the 'experiment' to basically ensure them. This is either complete incompetence on your part or more willful misrepresentation. Like I said, when you run an experiment that just so happens to give you results that run 180 degrees from your actual experience this should probably give you pause. Instead you took it as validation, haha.
So once again, you may want to take a minute and consider why you so consistently run into this sort of problem when almost no one else does. Why do you think that is?
So why posts should I have included?
So to get back on topic here in this thread, socialism still leads to suck (see Venezuela) and Scandinavian style social welfare programs are basically DOA in the U.S. although they'll remain the pipe dream of progressives since Truman and maybe before that. None of them ever lived to see it and I'm betting no one in this thread will ever live to see it either. Now we return you to regularly scheduled arguing about this for yet more decades to come.
So to get back on topic here in this thread, socialism still leads to suck (see Venezuela) and Scandinavian style social welfare programs are basically DOA in the U.S. although they'll remain the pipe dream of progressives since Truman and maybe before that. None of them ever lived to see it and I'm betting no one in this thread will ever live to see it either. Now we return you to regularly scheduled arguing about this for yet more decades to come.
Nah. The filibuster has been the primary impediment to that for a long time and it looks like that's slowly but surely dying. How fun! Imagine all the great stuff we'll be able to implement without it! Luckily for you our national health insurance will almost certainly cover the rage stroke you're likely to have once you see poor people getting things.
That trope has been done already and better than you.
So to get back on topic here in this thread, socialism still leads to suck (see Venezuela) and Scandinavian style social welfare programs are basically DOA in the U.S. although they'll remain the pipe dream of progressives since Truman and maybe before that. None of them ever lived to see it and I'm betting no one in this thread will ever live to see it either. Now we return you to regularly scheduled arguing about this for yet more decades to come.
Socialism fucking rules.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ted-socialism-doesnt-damage-economies-Bolivia
404
rule-fucking not found
Weird, if I google "poverty under morales" it's the second result for me. I wonder if it's a cache thing.
Or a UK versus US thing. This one works for me:
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ted-socialism-doesnt-damage-economies-bolivia
What a difference a capital B apparently makes
Socialism fucking rules.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ted-socialism-doesnt-damage-economies-Bolivia
Socialism that oddly has very non-progressive economic policies. Like an income tax rate much lower than ours (13%), even if you add their relatively high social security taxes it still remains below top U.S. marginal rates (which our progressives want to raise significantly). They also maintain a low debt to GDP ratio (around 30%) and government spending hasn't spiked during Morales either. Basically he's like he's listened to what Jhhnn, Fskimospy and others have asked for and done the exact opposite to obtain his good results.
Socialism that oddly has very non-progressive economic policies. Like an income tax rate much lower than ours (13%), even if you add their relatively high social security taxes it still remains below top U.S. marginal rates (which our progressives want to raise significantly). They also maintain a low debt to GDP ratio (around 30%) and government spending hasn't spiked during Morales either. Basically he's like he's listened to what Jhhnn, Fskimospy and others have asked for and done the exact opposite to obtain his good results.
404
rule-fucking not found
Government expenditures as a percentage of GDP in Bolivia have increased by more than 20% under Morales.
http://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Bolivia/Government_size/
Oops, haha.