The Election Was Actually Closer than Appearances


By Santa Cruzer   Follow   Sat, 10 Nov 2012, 11:40pm   7,682 views   182 comments
Watch (1)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike  

Was looking over the election returns we have thus far and noticed that Obama didn't have much daylight really in the three key battleground states -- FL, VA, and OH.

In these 3 states, if you assign the third party votes to their likely main party candidates, Romney comes up just 177,343 votes short . . . 43,000 in FL, 58,000 in OH, and 76,000 in VA.

(as an aside I guess the Republican government shutdown last year really did screw their bid for the White House)

It works out that if Romney could have flipped 1 out of 200 FL Obama voters to his column, 1 out of 100 OH Obama voters, and 1 out of 50 VA Obama voters, he'd be within 3 EVs of the 269 he needed to win.

Turns out that NH was 1 out of 25 Obama voters away, and that would have put him over the top.

With that I think the general triumphalism on the left is a bit overhyped. Not that the Republicans didn't get their teeth kicked in, but this is still a deeply divided country.

One other thing I noticed is that the white evangelical vote actually grew since 2004, rising from 23% of the vote to 26%. They broke the same for Romney, 78%, showing that they did in fact hold their nose for the Mormon and vote their family values preference.

« First     « Previous     Viewing Comments 143-182 of 182     Last »     See most liked comments

  1. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    143   4:39pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    Your Kaiser poll is about as credible as a Rasmussen poll

    The difference is Kaiser is mostly backed by the exit polling from last week.

    Exit polls poll a different population than actual scientific polls, but here's what was found:

    http://elections.msnbc.msn.com/ns/politics/2012/all/president/#exitPoll

    44-49-7, so you are not in the majority of actual 2012 voters as polled (just a plurality)

    Looking at the rabid opposition among Romney voters, they are just victims of the rightwing bullshit machine and they'll come out of it over time.

    Some of them will at least, and you can't deny that.

    Now, if you want to argue that Democrats are similarly deceived by what PPACA actually is going to do to/for people in 2013, you're welcome to make that.

    I don't see the big downside, frankly. Corporations might start screwing around with hiring (see Papa John) but that's just more political bullshit to deal with over time.

  2. bdrasin


    Follow
    Befriend
    7 threads
    561 comments
    Alameda, CA

    144   4:57pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    Exit polls poll a different population than actual scientific polls, but here's what was found:

    Interesting; if I had to guess a big chunk of the "Repeal some of it" crowd wants to get rid of the individual mandate and keep the ban on insurance companies discriminating on the basis of pre-existing conditions. And that just doesn't work. Its like being in favor of fried chicken and apple pie but against calories and fat.

  3. curious2


    Follow
    Befriend (4)
    116 threads
    4,363 comments

    145   5:01pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    bdrasin says

    get rid of the individual mandate and keep the ban on insurance companies discriminating on the basis of pre-existing conditions. And that just doesn't work.

    It does work, for example Japan has no penalty and Australia limits its penalty to high income taxpayers. And that doesn't even count the single payer and NHS countries. But, it's part of the bubble on each side to ignore the existence of contrary facts, even whole countries. Even President Obama, who campaigned against the individual mandate in 2008 when it was called Hillary's Plan, said the issue could be managed other ways.

    Bellingham Bill says

    44-49-7, so you are not in the majority of actual 2012 voters as polled (just a plurality)

    Good point, on binary questions I tend to count only those who have an opinion. But, technically, you're right, it's plurality not majority. It's also a wider margin than Romnesia's margin of defeat. So, if the election had been solely a referendum on this one policy, it would not have been particularly close. (As it was, I respect the fact that President Obama campaigned on this policy this time, and won a majority of votes, even though he had to carry a policy that would have lost on its own.)

  4. bdrasin


    Follow
    Befriend
    7 threads
    561 comments
    Alameda, CA

    146   5:18pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    bdrasin says

    get rid of the individual mandate and keep the ban on insurance companies discriminating on the basis of pre-existing conditions. And that just doesn't work.

    It does work, for example Japan has no penalty and Australia limits its penalty to high income taxpayers. And that doesn't even count the single payer and NHS countries. But, it's part of the bubble on each side to ignore the existence of contrary facts, even whole countries. Even President Obama, who campaigned against the individual mandate in 2008 when it was called Hillary's Plan, said the issue could be managed other ways.

    Take it easy with the ad-homonym, buddy. As far as I know, Australia is a single payer system. Re: Japan my friend who works in Japan says he's required to carry health insurance (which he considers tyranny, since he's a right-wing fundie). Wikipedia says "All residents of Japan are required by the law to have health insurance coverage." So if you know better than good for you, but that's not what I've heard.

    Logically I can see some ways that it could work without an individual mandate (namely lots of regulation or kick the uninsured out of the emergency room to die), but I think they would be considered unacceptable.

  5. curious2


    Follow
    Befriend (4)
    116 threads
    4,363 comments

    147   5:22pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    bdrasin says

    ad-homonym

    I didn't see any ad hominem arguments in that comment, but perhaps you can enlighten me. I'm not commenting on your misspelling, only your apparent misunderstanding of the phrase itself.

    As for the rest of your comment, Wikipedia is not a source. Japan has no penalty on individuals who do not buy insurance, and around 10% of the population choose not to. Australia has a combination of public and private. Anyway we will see soon enough how Obamacare plays out; it's based on Romneycare, which led to higher costs and premiums, despite Romnesia having promised the opposite.

  6. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    148   5:42pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    Japan has no penalty

    In Japan health insurance is a tax taken out of salary, handle by the local government, and not paying is basically tax evasion and treated as such. If you are employed you will not be able to talk HR into not enrolling you in the mandatory health plans.

    The plans are so cheap thanks to Japan's hyper-regulated system that there's really no point anyway.

    If for some reason you fail to pay into the system for a while, the local government rescinds your status as an insured person and it's tough to get back into the government's good graces.

    http://blog.japantimes.co.jp/yen-for-living/how-to-keep-your-health-insurance-when-you-cant-pay-for-it/

    While there is private insurance in Japan, by law it can only be supplementary and not compete with the state-designed and operated plans.

  7. bdrasin


    Follow
    Befriend
    7 threads
    561 comments
    Alameda, CA

    149   8:01pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    bdrasin says

    ad-homonym

    I didn't see any ad hominem arguments in that comment, but perhaps you can enlighten me. I'm not commenting on your misspelling, only your apparent misunderstanding of the phrase itself.

    Easy, you said that I am in a bubble and ignore contrary facts. I consider myself a man of the world and facts are of paramount importance to me, so naturally I take this as a personal insult. But anyway, it doesn't sound like you know any more about Japan or Australia's health care systems than I do.

    If you can explain a way that we could require insurers to cover people with pre-existing conditions without a mandate (individual or employer, doesn't really matter) I'd be interested to hear it. An actual explanation, not "do it like Japan/Singapore/Country XYZ". Not because the experience of other countries isn't important, but rather because your not really telling me what it is that they do.

    I'm not a huge supporter of PPACA, but it was all we could get through Congress. I'm not optimistic about improving it in the short term either, since the things I can think of that would help have no chance (*NO* chance) of getting through the House and Senate.

  8. curious2


    Follow
    Befriend (4)
    116 threads
    4,363 comments

    150   8:06pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    bdrasin says

    you said that I am in a bubble and ignore contrary facts

    I didn't say that you personally were in a bubble. But, you were definitely ignoring contrary facts, and instead repeating a false talking point from people who do live in the Democrats' bubble.

    bdrasin says

    I'd be interested to hear

    http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal/essay/adverse-selection-in-insurance-markets:-an-exaggerated-threat/

    Also you might ask New York how they have guaranteed issue without mandates. For most of the history of insurance, which goes back centuries, there were no mandates. But, mandates may be necessary if you want to increase spending (aka revenue from lobbyists' POV) to the extent Romneycare did and Obamacare is projected to do. It's funny but also sad to see Bill cite the similarity to Romneycare (and even lurch into profanity) as if that were an argument in favor of the plan.

  9. bdrasin


    Follow
    Befriend
    7 threads
    561 comments
    Alameda, CA

    151   9:26pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    bdrasin says
    you said that I am in a bubble and ignore contrary facts

    I didn't say that you personally were in a bubble.

    No, you just made a statement that made no sense except in light of the clearly implied assumption that I am in a bubble. Have you stopped beating your wife?

    But, you were definitely ignoring contrary facts, and instead repeating a false talking point from people who do live in the Democrats' bubble.

    No sir. You can be assured that anything I say is my own opinions based on my own assessment of facts as best I understand them, not anyone's talking points.

    curious2 says

    http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal/essay/adverse-selection-in-insurance-markets:-an-exaggerated-threat/

    Also you might ask New York how they have guaranteed issue without mandates.

    Skimmed the article, don't understand it, sorry. I don't know anything about health care in New York - does New York have universal health care coverage?

    The problem (not a talking point, my own understanding) is that once someone has a serious health care need no insurer will cover them because it will be unprofitable (duh). Same reason you can't get in a car accident, then buy car insurance and have them pay for the accident you just had.

    If this is just some hollow talking point with an easy solution, why don't YOU explain to me how they in our system you can force insurance companies to accept people with preexisting condition? No reading assignment please, explain it in your own words; you seem to think you understand it quite well.

  10. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    152   9:53pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    Also you might ask New York how they have guaranteed issue without mandates.

    Why Health Care Is So Expensive in New York

    "Today, New York's private individual insurance market is among the nation's most expensive and highly regulated. New York City residents buying private, unsubsidized individual insurance coverage pay at least $9,036 a year for individual coverage and $26,460 for family coverage. New York's average premiums in the individual market are more than twice the national average, according to a 2007 eHealth Insurance survey."

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703746604574461482860007734.html

  11. Homeboy


    Follow
    Befriend
    39 threads
    3,546 comments

    153   9:55pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Dan8267 says

    Your maturity is overwhelming.

    Dan's message-board playbook:

    1.) Become faced with a cogent argument that you are unable to counter
    2.) Begin lashing out with personal insults

    First off, I have no political stake in whether or not the election was close. Frankly I don't give a damn whether or not it was.

    Thou doth protest too much.

    If the election was a landslide, I'd call it a landslide. It matters not to me at all. But putting reality before politics does. Remember, I'm the one who called the election for Obama on this site.

    Ah, the "landslide" strawman again. Third time's a charm?

    Second, your reading comprehension skills are abysmal.

    Aw Dan, really? You're gonna trot out that tired message-board cliche? You obviously have got nothing.

  12. Homeboy


    Follow
    Befriend
    39 threads
    3,546 comments

    154   9:58pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    bdrasin says

    The problem (not a talking point, my own understanding) is that once someone has a serious health care need no insurer will cover them because it will be unprofitable (duh). Same reason you can't get in a car accident, then buy car insurance and have them pay for the accident you just had.

    If this is just some hollow talking point with an easy solution, why don't YOU explain to me how they in our system you can force insurance companies to accept people with preexisting condition? No reading assignment please, explain it in your own words; you seem to think you understand it quite well.

    He always says that. That's his stock reply when he has no answer; he accuses you of using "talking points". Easy way to dodge the argument.

  13. curious2


    Follow
    Befriend (4)
    116 threads
    4,363 comments

    155   10:04pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    bdrasin says

    If this is just some hollow talking point with an easy solution, why don't YOU explain to me how they in our system you can force insurance companies to accept people with preexisting condition?

    Consider the existing system. Employers and Medicare use open enrollment periods, for example. Consider Obamacare: what stops somebody from signing up for a minimal plan, then switching to a more comprehensive plan when their needs change? Others offered other solutions, for example subsidizing high-cost people, but remember the real beneficiaries are usually the revenue recipients. If you get a terminal diagnosis, and it's going to cost $500k and you'll probably die anyway, would you really spend the $500k that way if it was your own money? If you wouldn't, why should everyone else be required to? Ultimately you have a revenue-maximizing system in which a coalition of the bribed decide what they say is best for you, when in reality it happens to be what's most lucrative for themselves; Obamacare is projected to increase spending/revenue even faster than prior law, just as Romneycare increased spending/revenue in Massachusetts.

    Bellingham Bill says

    curious2 says

    Also you might ask New York how they have guaranteed issue without mandates.

    Why Health Care Is So Expensive in New York

    "unsubsidized individual insurance coverage pay at least $9,036 a year...."

    The average per capita medical spending in the United States is around $8k/year, so $9k/yr for a high-cost area like New York is only around 10% above average. Look at average rents in New York compared to the national average, if you want to see a glaring disparity. In any event, you're quoting unsubsidized policies, the Obamacare policies will be heavily subsidized, so that changes the numbers considerably. Also, the cost of the premium depends on how many lobbies (chiropractic, faith healers, etc.) have lobbied successfully to get their product or "service" mandated. Stay tuned for all manner of "free" Rx pills advertised as "preventive care" on TV.

  14. thomaswong.1986


    Follow
    Befriend
    27 threads
    6,131 comments

    156   11:37pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Funny thing on the way to the polls in Santa Clara Valley

    Year..........GOP..........DEM
    2012..........136347.........343239
    2008..........190039..........462241

    Change..........-53,692..........-119,002
    %.....................-28.25%.........-25.74%

    53K Gop 2008 voters didnt vote.. down 28%
    119K Dems 2008 voters didnt vote .. down 26%

  15. Homeboy


    Follow
    Befriend
    39 threads
    3,546 comments

    157   11:42pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    Consider Obamacare: what stops somebody from signing up for a minimal plan, then switching to a more comprehensive plan when their needs change?

    An insurance plan will have to meet certain minimum standards in order to cover the individual mandate. You won't be able to get out of paying the fine by enrolling in a so-called "catastrophic" plan. Such plans will most likely not have much use anymore.

  16. Homeboy


    Follow
    Befriend
    39 threads
    3,546 comments

    158   11:46pm Wed 14 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    If you get a terminal diagnosis, and it's going to cost $500k and you'll probably die anyway, would you really spend the $500k that way if it was your own money? If you wouldn't, why should everyone else be required to?

    Because most people are not as callous as you. We, as a society, do not let people die simply because they don't have the cash to pay for medical treatment. If a terminally ill person wishes to forego treatment, I think he should be allowed to. But I don't think he should be FORCED to go without treatment.

  17. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    159   12:33pm Thu 15 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    If you get a terminal diagnosis, and it's going to cost $500k

    $500,000 is one third of a penny across the 150M rate-payers.

    Plus our medical system is about twice as expensive (profit-ridden) as other systems, so that should be one sixth of a penny.

    Thing is, all taxes come out of rents.

    Our low tax regime is just allowing rents to be jacked up on everyone.

    Housing rents are THE rent suck in the system, probably as bad as health care, maybe more. The economics profession is UTTERLY corrupted in hiding this central issue in our economy for some reason.

    The secret of the high-tax high-service nordic economies (and Germany) is that they run balanced books, taxing everyone to pay for their pretty good government services.

    This prevents the housing rent-seekers from getting a full tap on their victims.

  18. curious2


    Follow
    Befriend (4)
    116 threads
    4,363 comments

    160   12:57pm Thu 15 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    Housing rents are THE rent suck in the system, probably as bad as health care, maybe more.

    Medical already exceeds housing, and Obamacare is projected to propel medical even higher. Think of it as good news then: the $ won't be available to pay rent.

  19. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    161   1:13pm Thu 15 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    Medical already exceeds housing

    Maybe, maybe not. Nationwide, the average rent is $900. But in the big cities, rents are much, much higher, as the higher salaries have to bid up a land-constrained supply.

    We know that medical costs are pushing 20% of the GDP, but the bulk of these costs come at end of life.

    Housing rents come as a rule at the beginning of adult life, as it generally takes people 5-10 years to escape the rent trap.

    We have a minimum of $500B/yr in housing rents. We should also add in the hundreds of billions of commercial rents consumers pay on a pass-through basis (though of course if the landlord didn't take this surplus the commercial operator would have, nobody leaves rents on the table).

    curious2 says

    Obamacare is projected to propel medical even higher

    dubious assertion, especially over the long-term as our transition from the world's shittiest healthcare system gets rolling over time.

    curious2 says

    Think of it as good news then: the $ won't be available to pay rent.

    You snark, but that is actually EXACTLY my thesis. I'm perfectly happy if everyone pays twice the global average for health care if those rents would come out of housing rents, since we'd be at least GETTING SOMETHING for our money.

    Landlords as a rule do not create anything new -- other than handling maintenance as minimally as they can get away with -- to collect their rents. For the most part, they are really getting something for nothing, capturing the site value of their community and carting it off.

  20. curious2


    Follow
    Befriend (4)
    116 threads
    4,363 comments

    162   1:15pm Thu 15 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    curious2 says

    Medical already exceeds housing

    Maybe, maybe not

    From the booster's mouth:

    http://www.nahb.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=66226

    Bellingham Bill says

    dubious assertion

    Projected consistently by the administration's CMS actuaries and reiterated this year, Obamacare increases spending above prior law.

    Bellingham Bill says

    GETTING SOMETHING for our money

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/09/how-american-health-care-killed-my-father/307617/?single_page=true

  21. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    163   1:25pm Thu 15 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    From the booster's mouth:

    the bulk of "housing services" renters pay is whatever it takes to keep the next guy from taking over his lease. Some fucking service.

    I was renting an apartment in Sunnyvale with a kitchen that hadn't been redone since the late 80s (the sticker on the microwave said that).

    Yet the rent was twice what it was in the 1980s. The owner's cost basis sure as hell hadn't gone up 2X, largely thanks to Prop 13.

    The housing sector is 90% bullshit in this country. On the other hand, I think our medical system is pretty good -- much better than Japan's at least -- if you can get and afford the insurance to stay in the top-tiers of it.

    God help you if you are un- or underinsured though! Man you're screwed, unlike all other first-world nations.

  22. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    164   1:31pm Thu 15 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    CMS actuaries and reiterated this year, Obamacare increases spending above prior law.

    yes, of course, since we're putting millions of more people into the system and paying for what they need. This is going to really raise costs and put supply/demand pressures.

    However, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, ya know. Over time, Obamacare, and what follows from it, if and when this nation can pull itself together a little more, will reduce costs.

  23. curious2


    Follow
    Befriend (4)
    116 threads
    4,363 comments

    165   1:32pm Thu 15 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    our medical system is pretty good -- much better than Japan's at least

    Interesting comparison - Japan has the longest life expectancy in the world. Why is our system better?

    Bellingham Bill says

    However, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, ya know. Over time, Obamacare, and what follows from it, if and when this nation can pull itself together a little more, will reduce costs.

    Obamacare is projected to increase spending for as far as the eye can see. Romneycare increased spending, even though it was sold on the same false promise of saving money. Contrary to Democrats' mythology spread by Families USA (SEIU), services marketed as "preventive care" do not save money. Vaccines probably do, but Obamacare increases the tax on those, while maintaining subsidies for HFCS. It isn't about reducing costs.

    "What's new is that CT is being marketed as a preventive or proactive health care measure to healthy individuals who have no symptoms of disease [despite the fact that there are] No Proven Benefits for Healthy People"

    Getting something for your money, that "healthy" glow in the dark.

  24. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    166   1:57pm Thu 15 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    Interesting comparison - Japan has the longest life expectancy in the world. Why is our system better?

    Well, I lived in Tokyo for 8 years so I speak from experience.

    Japanese doctors tend to suck and I wouldn't necessarily trust one any further than I could throw him.

    Physicians in the BC/BS system where I've lived -- Bay Area, Santa Cruz -- are generally world-class.

    One problem with Japan's system is that they don't do as much post-doc stuff, and the doctor's educational track starts in the first year of college.

    Japanese life expectancy could simply be from all the fish & rice they eat.

  25. curious2


    Follow
    Befriend (4)
    116 threads
    4,363 comments

    167   2:58pm Thu 15 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    Japanese life expectancy could simply be from all the fish & rice they eat.

    Yes, and exercise. It's a reason why I think increasing medical spending is a bad idea, because most of it is wasted.

    I've had this disagreement with Bob, whose wife is a doctor. He says they are expats largely because of the problems with the American medical system, and I can certainly understand that. He also seems to attribute more credit for increasing longevity to medicine than I do.

    Anyway we will see how Obamacare turns out, but the lobbyists who wrote it wanted more spending, and the experience of Romneycare corroborates the official projections showing that is the most likely result. There are many advancing technologies (devices and vaccines) that should reduce costs, but PhRMA cut a deal to tax those in order to subsidize allopathy. Intervening forces will determine most of the results, and as JFK said "Success has a thousand fathers, but failure is an orphan."

  26. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    168   3:04pm Thu 15 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    Yes, and exercise.

    I agree 100% with this.

    is a *very* common sight in Tokyo.

    As a rule, people in Tokyo only buy at the grocery store what they can personally schlep home.

    That's a great way to stay healthy.

    I also agree that our way of life is going to blow up medical costs in this country.

    Doing nothing is not going to help that though, if we can get people INTO the system we can get better, less expensive outcomes.

    This nation has the surplus wealth to tackle this problem.

    The problem is the top 5% are sitting on it.

    http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/GINIALLRH

  27. Homeboy


    Follow
    Befriend
    39 threads
    3,546 comments

    169   11:35pm Thu 15 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    Well, I lived in Tokyo for 8 years so I speak from experience.

    Japanese doctors tend to suck and I wouldn't necessarily trust one any further than I could throw him.

    Physicians in the BC/BS system where I've lived -- Bay Area, Santa Cruz -- are generally world-class.

    One problem with Japan's system is that they don't do as much post-doc stuff, and the doctor's educational track starts in the first year of college.

    Japanese life expectancy could simply be from all the fish & rice they eat.

    I agree. I was employed in Japan with a group of Americans. We all lost weight from eating less and walking more. But I was not impressed with the medical clinics. They way overprescibed. They prescribed antibiotics for a common cold, and the nurses didn't seem to have any medical training at all - just glorified orderlies.

  28. Bigsby


    Follow
    Befriend
    1 threads
    4,591 comments
    Monterey, CA

    170   1:20am Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    Well, I lived in Tokyo for 8 years so I speak from experience.

    Japanese doctors tend to suck and I wouldn't necessarily trust one any further than I could throw him.

    Physicians in the BC/BS system where I've lived -- Bay Area, Santa Cruz -- are generally world-class.

    One problem with Japan's system is that they don't do as much post-doc stuff, and the doctor's educational track starts in the first year of college.

    Japanese life expectancy could simply be from all the fish & rice they eat.

    Well, I had a different experience while living there, and given the levels of coverage and costs to the country...

  29. Bigsby


    Follow
    Befriend
    1 threads
    4,591 comments
    Monterey, CA

    171   1:27am Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    ...is a *very* common sight in Tokyo.

    As a rule, people in Tokyo only buy at the grocery store what they can personally schlep home.

    That's a great way to stay healthy.

    I'd say it's much more diet than exercise - outside peddling and walking about (and playing baseball), I never saw people doing that much exercise. I guess we'll see in coming years as diets seem to have worsened in Japan.
    A mention for green tea as well.

  30. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    172   8:37pm Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    wikipedia has updated their election page, and using their numbers, I get:

    Proportion of Obama voters Romney needed in Florida (1 out of 115 to switch):
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☻

    Ohio (1 out of 52)
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☻

    Virginia (1 out of 26)
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☻

    Colorado (1 out of 20)
    ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☺ ☻

  31. Homeboy


    Follow
    Befriend
    39 threads
    3,546 comments

    173   9:04pm Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    Homeboy says

    Romney would have had to win a whole bunch of states that he didn't win

    "bunch" being 4, or 3 if the Republicans in OH were to decide to apportion EVs by congressional district

    2004 was a close election too, (officially) coming down to 120,000-odd votes in OH. So 60,000 voters in OH determined the election by choosing Bush instead of Kerry.

    FL is closer than that -- 70,000, or half that if the libertarian voters could change their vote to Romney
    Give the libertarian vote to Romney and VA is a 110,000 difference.
    Give the libertarian vote to Romney and OH is a 50,000 difference this year.

    So three states are "close" and these 3 states would put Romney within 3 EVs of winning. CLOSE.

    You guys just don't seem to get the difference between:

    "The election was close" and
    "If X, Y, and Z happened, the election would have been close"

    Those two statements are not the same.

  32. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    174   9:23pm Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Homeboy says

    "If X, Y, and Z happened, the election would have been close"

    Like I said above, X, Y, and Z are not independent events.

    What was necessary for Romney to pick off 1 out of 20 voters in CO would have given him VA, OH, and FL, too.

    I don't know what the missing factor for Romney was. He is a shitty person and was a shittier candidate and I'm more than glad he lost.

    He did very well among Fundamentalists, better than Bush in 2004, so it wasn't that that stopped him. Hopefully it was the 47% video. Nothing like a little slip of the mask to sink someone.

    But my point with this is just that 2016 is going to be a whole new battle and 2012 was not the overwhelming drubbing the conventional wisdom says it was.

    It was 1 out of 20 Obama voters in CO, basically. Give the libertarian vote to the Republicans and it was 1 out of 25 Obama voters.

  33. curious2


    Follow
    Befriend (4)
    116 threads
    4,363 comments

    175   9:34pm Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bill, I've been thinking about your theory of rents, i.e. that taxes (including Obamacare) come out of rents, and I have a question. What about consumer goods? The most valuable corporation on earth is AAPL, and nearly all of its revenues come from consumers' disposable income. Isn't it possible that both taxes and rents can increase at the same time, at the expense of consumer goods companies like AAPL?

  34. curious2


    Follow
    Befriend (4)
    116 threads
    4,363 comments

    176   9:41pm Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    [Romnesia] did very well among Fundamentalists, better than Bush in 2004, so it wasn't that that stopped him. Hopefully it was the 47% video. Nothing like a little slip of the mask to sink someone.

    I've seen exit polls saying Protestant voters chose him by a margin of 15% and evangelicals by 60%, while Obama won among all other religious groups.

    http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president#exit-polls

    But, I haven't seen anything on turnout by religion? I would guess that black churches may have turned out heavily for Obama, I don't know how turnout went among white churches.

  35. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    177   9:52pm Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    Isn't it possible that both taxes and rents can increase at the same time, at the expense of consumer goods companies like AAPL?

    yes I guess. And consumers can be forced to cut back actual quality of life, buy hot dogs instead of steak, run the heat only half the time, etc.

    Thing is, taxes and housing rents are our two biggest line items. I'm the world's biggest Apple nut but my sum total of purchases from them averages ~$80/mo over the past 23 years. Rent has been an order of magnitude more, of course.

    Where landlords and renters draw the line on how much rent is enough is a difficult thing to analyze. My previous experience living in an Archstone-like apartment complex (300+ units) really sucked, I could see from how quick vacancies filled for them that I had zero negotiating power -- the annual rent increases were either bend over or move out.

    But in Japan I lived in the same place for 5 years with no rent increases. That was nice.

    Tax increases hit all renters across the board, which I would think rolls back the power of landlords to find someone to outbid their current tenant-victims.

    But this is kinda theoretical I admit.

  36. Bellingham Bill


    Follow
    Befriend
    77 threads
    3,210 comments
    Bellingham, WA

    178   9:55pm Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    I don't know how turnout went among white churches.

    the cnn exit polling has "white evangelicals" at 78% for Romney, the same % Bush got.

    This group actually increased their share of the electorate, from 23% to 26%, a rather impressive increase in only 8 years.

  37. Homeboy


    Follow
    Befriend
    39 threads
    3,546 comments

    179   11:01pm Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    Like I said above, X, Y, and Z are not independent events.

    What was necessary for Romney to pick off 1 out of 20 voters in CO would have given him VA, OH, and FL, too.

    Look, I don't know how to make this any more plain. "X would have happened" is not the same statement as "X happened." End of story. Let's stop arguing about it now.

    I don't know what the missing factor for Romney was. He is a shitty person and was a shittier candidate and I'm more than glad he lost.

    He did very well among Fundamentalists, better than Bush in 2004, so it wasn't that that stopped him. Hopefully it was the 47% video. Nothing like a little slip of the mask to sink someone.

    But my point with this is just that 2016 is going to be a whole new battle and 2012 was not the overwhelming drubbing the conventional wisdom says it was.

    I think you WAY overestimate the general population. You're way over on the left coast, and I think you forget that the whole middle of the country is filled with toothless yokels who A) wouldn't vote for a black man if he were the last person on earth, and B) think that "progressive" and "liberal" are 4-letter words. Concepts such as the financial elite getting the capital gains rate lowered so that a very small percentage of the population controls almost all of the wealth and pay less of a percentage in taxes than the middle class, are completely lost on those people. They DO NOT understand that Romney isn't on the side of the lower-middle class. That is much too subtle for them to pick up. They only understand things like "them Mexicans is takin' our jobs and gettin' the free health care". So if you were expecting some kind of 80-20 landslide Obama victory because it's "so obvious" Romney's a bad guy, and were surprised that it was close to a half-and-half split, I just don't think you understand that a very large portion of the country is not like where you live. Unless there is a pretty major demographic change in the US, we aren't ever going to have a landslide victory in a presidential race.

  38. curious2


    Follow
    Befriend (4)
    116 threads
    4,363 comments

    180   11:14pm Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Homeboy says

    the whole middle of the country is filled with toothless yokels who A) wouldn't vote for a black man if he were the last person on earth

    There is a middle column from North Dakota south to Texas that seems to vote Republican every time. The only way to test if it's based on color would have been if the Republicans had nominated Herman Cain. But, many states between the two coasts that voted for Bush in 2004 voted for Obama in 2008:

    http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/president/

    http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/president/

    So, the (in)accuracy of your comment depends on what you mean by "the whole middle of the country." And toothless. And yokel. BTW, even within that middle column, there is a more significant division between urban and rural; Houston and New Orleans have both elected black mayors, for example.

  39. Homeboy


    Follow
    Befriend
    39 threads
    3,546 comments

    181   11:16pm Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    Bellingham Bill says

    It was 1 out of 20 Obama voters in CO, basically. Give the libertarian vote to the Republicans and it was 1 out of 25 Obama voters.

    I'm not seeing it. The libertarian candidate was pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage, wanted to repeal the Patriot Act, and wanted to legalize marijuana. We're talking about a completely different pool of voters.

  40. Homeboy


    Follow
    Befriend
    39 threads
    3,546 comments

    182   11:18pm Fri 16 Nov 2012   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

    curious2 says

    So, the (in)accuracy of your comment depends on what you mean by "the whole middle of the country." And toothless. And yokel. BTW, even within that middle column, there is a more significant division between urban and rural; Houston and New Orleans have both elected black mayors, for example.

    Yeah, you got me. I was being just a tad bit hyperbolic. ;)

« First     « Previous comments    

Santa Cruzer is moderator of this thread.

Email

Username

Watch comments by email
Home   Tips and Tricks   Questions or suggestions? Mail p@patrick.net   Thank you for your kind donations

Page took 202 milliseconds to create.