Joined Mar 29, 2013 at 01:58AM EDT
| || |
If you had just said “another person”, I think most of us would agree with your sarcasm… the specificity of “gay person” makes it seem like you’re implying that gay people are more likely than the average person to “take advantage and wrongfully influence society”.. which makes you look like a raging asshole.
Just so ya know.
Thanks for your reply. Yeah, you’re absolutely right. It’s nice to talk to people who may come to different conclusions, but at least are using the same premises – just interpreting them differently.
I appreciate it! Have a good one.
Let me quote myself: “yes, higher population density does lead to higher health costs within those areas, but it is still irrelevant to the point being made… this is why:”
You obviously didn’t read the rest. Or didn’t comprehend it.
It’s not relevant to the comparison of the U.S. to other industrialized nations unless we are only spending more than countries with lower density, and those of higher density are higher or comparable to us. That’s not the case. The fact that Norway, with such a low population density is above all of the European countries, as well as Japan, further proves that it is not a driving factor in the disparity of health spending. (or, Norway would be lower than THOSE countries as well (who are many times more dense than the U.S.)
See: point about Japan. (and all of the other countries I listed)
Claim I’m playing a game and accuse me of obfuscation, if that makes you feel better – but your logic doesn’t pan out. Sorry.
Not really sure how population density is relevant to discussion of what countries pay per person for health care. So. It didn’t go over my head, it is just totally irrelevant.
yes, higher population density does lead to higher health costs within those areas, but it is still irrelevant to the point being made… this is why:
First, The point being made was that compared to ALL other industrialized nations, we spend the most, and even the next in line is way below us. It was not meant to be a direct comparison of ONLY the U.S. and Norway, but the U.S. and everyone else.
(Norway just happened to be the #2, if #2 had been the U.K., Germany, Netherlands, Italy, France, Switzerland, Austria… well, you get the picture.. then the “density!” argument would be invalid. And, since all of those countries are below Norway on the list of spending, then obviously the density is not the reason Norway’s health spending is lower.)
Japan spends around $5000 less per capita on health care than we do, & they have the longest life expectancy. Plus they have a population density of 10x that of the U.S.
Given those facts – Norway’s density doesn’t have anything at all to do with the argument articulated above, nor should it have anything to do with an attempt to refute it. Since that’s the case, I assumed you were trying to refute the argument above with an overall population comparison. My mistake. Evidently you were just bringing up interesting trivia for fun.
I also wonder if he’d have said “Dave, you’re handsome, but you have to be honest as well” if it were a dude?
When a journalist hears someone saying bullshit, it’s their JOB to call it out. That’s journalism, not bias.
It’s too much to go into here, but there are SO many things he said that are simply FACTUALLY wrong.
Being “unbiased” doesn’t mean passively accepting whatever bullshit spin a politician in putting onto their stance. For people from either side.
Journalists should be biased – biased toward facts. Biased toward logic.
Unfortunately, our media is terrible at calling facts the facts, because they don’t want to appear “biased”… and that’s because when politicians get called out on their bullshit, they cry about how the “mainstream media is biased”.
You don’t know what “per capita” means, do you?
I think this one is my favorite
Yeah, I’m totally sure the author of this rant actually looks JUST LIKE all of the A&F models. If he doesn’t, I hope he has the bravery to be consistent and hate himself for it.
Uploaded an image to Red Equal Sign.