June 23, 2009

Vox Populi

Scrivrner.net posts:

Ezra Klein says that the latest poll results find that national health care is very popular with the public, so failing to enact it would be "resolutely, aggressively, anti-democratic" -- a denial of our responsibility in a democracy.

Paul Krugman says that the latest poll results find that the public prefers reducing the deficit over increasing government spending. But the voters "don't know much" about policy, "So the moral for Obama is, of course, to ignore this poll" -- anything else would be a denial of our responsibility in a democracy.

Discuss.

Media and Blogging Posted by John Kranz at June 23, 2009 2:38 PM

Heh - great juxtaposition.

Though the original post does not say, I suspect that Klein is refering to a recent NYT poll. As it turns out, that poll showing strong support for a national healthcare system was taken from a sample comprised fo 46% Democrats and 24% Republicans (or thereabouts). There are two ways to monkey with a poll: jimmy the sample or jimmy the question. Of course, you always have the option of ignoring the result in either case, as Krugman suggests, by deeming the sample to be idiots.

Posted by: Boulder Refugee at June 23, 2009 3:09 PM

Versus 46% idiots?

I didn't just say that, did I?

Posted by: jk at June 23, 2009 3:45 PM

Do you all remember this poll out of the NYtimes saying we all wanted guaranteed health care and would be happy to pay as much as $500 more per year for it.
Sheesh.
Idiots. You're right.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/02/washington/02poll.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin

Posted by: Terri at June 23, 2009 4:11 PM

Who wouldn't be happy paying $500 per year for healthcare? That's about half of the monthly premium for a family. But then you have to ask yourself, "How much care could any system afford to give me for $500 per year?" Idiots indeed.

Posted by: Boulder Refugee at June 23, 2009 4:52 PM

My wife and I have a high-deductible plan that costs a hair under $10,000 a year. The bulk is paid for by my employer.

Basically, we pay the first $2300 per calendar year, and above that, 20% up to $2300 per calendar year. It's a good plan for us, just in case something happens. People just don't realize how expensive a fully comprehensive plan is. We have a legally binding agreement that if either of us gets cancer, needs a heart operation, etc., our insurer is going to pay for it.

The plan would be less expensive if, first, we could buy the policy from someone out of state, and second, if insurers started rating policyholders on risk. They can do that now, I think since 2006, but it hasn't caught on. Previously, smokers, non-smokers, people with family histories of heart disease and/or cancer, were lumped into the same category.

But hey, this is the age where Obama will help us pay for our mortgages and put gas in our cars.

Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at June 25, 2009 12:54 PM | What do you think? [5]