Thread: Fact Checking the GOP Debate

Originally Posted by Slartibartfas

You contradict yourself here. The prediction was talking about some people choosing to quit their job because the main reason for still being in work was the health insurance. If they quit, this might make your society as a whole a tiny bit less efficient and productive (but only if the same guy is not doing something other productive instead, paid or not), but I just can't see how it could mean that the job would disappear. I know the WSP article talked about jobs not being replaced but can anyone give me a specific example of how that would look like?

I'm not contradicting myself at all. I 'm drawing on the article "fact checking" the debate. Which clearly states : "These jobs would disappear, not to be replaced" as a rebuttal (by "correction") to the job's lost due to health care reform claim.

Quite disgusting how politicians are masters at deception, slanting the facts, etc. And it doesn't happen with just the Repubs. No wonder the country is in such a mess. It's run by a bunch of lying sons of bitches. Ought to be a law against bamboozling the public. Hell, most of Congress would be in jail if that were the case, common criminals with suits. Yet perfectly acceptable by us citizens, or some of us. A few even love it, as all is fair in getting your fav flavor of ideology doing your bidding in D.C. Well, we sure got the gov't we deserve, I reckon.

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

I'm not contradicting myself at all. I 'm drawing on the article "fact checking" the debate. Which clearly states : "These jobs would disappear, not to be replaced" as a rebuttal (by "correction") to the job's lost due to health care reform claim.

Whatever, it still makes no sense to me. That is why I asked for a specific example to get an idea how this should work. So far no one has given any.

Originally Posted by wooyarn

I think what they are saying is that instead of people working until 65 to get on medicare they would chose to retire earlier. The job would not just disappear it would be there for someone younger. Some jobs might disappear but not all.

I have to agree, I read it that way too.

However I am having a problem with the numbers cited. I refuse to believe that that many people would retire from the work force early simply because they could get medical coverage.....which they would still have to pay for.

And, as usual, I have problems with Bachmann and most of her claims.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

Quite disgusting how politicians are masters at deception, slanting the facts, etc. And it doesn't happen with just the Repubs. No wonder the country is in such a mess. It's run by a bunch of lying sons of bitches. Ought to be a law against bamboozling the public. Hell, most of Congress would be in jail if that were the case, common criminals with suits. Yet perfectly acceptable by us citizens, or some of us. A few even love it, as all is fair in getting your fav flavor of ideology doing your bidding in D.C. Well, we sure got the gov't we deserve, I reckon.

Well, they're no more lying sons of bitches than any major corporation and the advertising they do? Don't blame the messenger, they're doing what sells. It's the voter that buys this bullshit.

These debates make my head explode

I'm now at 1/3 of the debate. Some observations:

- (as pointed out in this thread) the moderators don't call out the candidates on their lies.
- the collective standpoint on health cost and the uninsured seems to be "Not the govt's problem. And we won't allow states to have mandates either". I understand personal responsibility jada jada, but this is bad for the economy as a whole and puts the US at a severe disadvantage compared to abroad, but they aren't called out on that.
- Newt gets to rail against the supposed bias of the moderators questions and the media and how bad Obama is. This is his modus operandi. After 2 debates I have no idea what the guy stands for.
- Perry's "90% of job growth in Texas is above the minimum wage" in response to the question "is this the job growth that we want?". Just because a job pays slightly higher than the minimum wage doesn't mean it is supportive of a middle class.
- They haven't moved beyond "drill baby drill". $2 gas? Demand is at its lowest now because of the unemployed and stagnant economic growth. Prices have only one way to go after this, and that is up.

Moderators don't call out candidates very often. That's one of the terms agreed to to have a debate. No one challenges anyone's facts except as part of a rebuttal.

Debates aren't really debates so much as beauty contests. You just hope that at some point someone will say something interesting and insightful.