On Reasoning from Truth to Error


Two men valiantly faced the public one day, armed with the truth, and came away with complete failure.

First man:

He also disputed the notion that adding a government-run insurance plan into a menu of options from which people could pick would drive private insurers out of business, in effect making the system single-payer by default.

As long as they have a good product and the government plan has to sustain itself through premiums and other non-tax revenue, private insurers should be able to compete with the government plan, Obama said.

“They do it all the time,” he said. “UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. … It’s the Post Office that’s always having problems.”

Second man:

I’m encouraging constitutional rights.  I’m encouraging constitutional rights by coming to Lebanon to talk to my constituents.  I could be somewhere else.  I don’t get any extra pay — I don’t have any requirement to be here.

Both men made true statements. The United States Postal Service does have trouble getting by without public funding, and the Senator did not have any requirement to be there.

The trouble is that the true statements, made under the stress of the moment, did not support the conclusion either man wished to reach.

The first man tried to say that like the USPS, a government insurance plan would not outcompete private insurers. Instead, it would go bankrupt. Therefore, it’s a good thing.

There are many problems with this reasoning. First, there is no chance that Congress would allow a government insurance issuer to run out of money. Once people have paid premiums, from that day forward the program would have assurance of bailout after expensive bailiout.So the unstated premise fails. and the conclusion along with it.

Secondly, if we know that the plan will be a failure, why bother doing it?

Third, but by no means exhausting the supply of problems, the success or failure of the program is not even the real issue. As is typical with the type of argument this man uses, he is attempting here to argue a question his opponents aren’t raising.

The policies set by the government plan will drive the market in several ways. It would be a strong influence on private insurance practice on the one hand, while removing downward price pressure on the other. Currently the insurance companies have to compete with a vacuum, since people can opt out of insurance altogether. With a mandatory plan in place, there will be no need to compete against the vacuum of opting out.

The second man? No, you don’t need to be there. Pat Toomey would agree.



RSS feed

10 Comments Leave a comment

Sen. Specter did not have a good day, did he?

penguin2 (Diary) Wednesday, August 12th at 7:54AM EST (link)

Watching his Townhall, he looked mighty flustered. Specter and others like him are finding out who their constituency really is. Not the plants and bused in ACORN and associated groups. They are having trouble with the stage they have set and the play on the handbill. People are coming and rewriting the script.

At least he wasn’t hiding out, or canceling like some of his fellow Senators and Congressmen.

I liked your last line “no, you don’t need to be there.” That might make an excellent campaign slogan.

Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God. – Benjamin Franklin
When Good stands up to Evil, Evil blinks. – Vassar Bushmills

Conservative Education: Suggested Reading List

Activists Taking Action: Unified Patriots

That's the first thing I thought

Loren Heal (Diary) Wednesday, August 12th at 7:56AM EST (link)

when I heard him say he didn’t need to be there. It’s sort of a body language thing: subconciously he doesn’t want to be there.

Easy fix for that, Senator.


Join the Concord Project, and follow @lheal, if you dare.

 

His day wasn't that bad.

wordsarepower (Diary) Wednesday, August 12th at 9:48AM EST (link)

The “Nazis” were very kind to him, really. And, he didn’t really answer any questions, he just held to the party line. I think he got off easy at this one.

You know, I got to wondering about his statement about not needing to be there. I’ve not been passionate about politics until the last mid-term elections, but I don’t remember there being this kind of coverage of town halls before. Maybe they do have to do this…maybe they were given instruction to do this…and maybe he was just trying to come off as a good guy who is willing to go the extra mile to be ther for his constituents?

And…I do like the slogan idea! :)

We are not Nazis!

Loren Heal (Diary) Wednesday, August 12th at 9:52AM EST (link)

We are the mob.

Let’s watch that.


Join the Concord Project, and follow @lheal, if you dare.

I was not serious...

wordsarepower (Diary) Wednesday, August 12th at 9:58AM EST (link)

that’s why the word was in quotes.

Just policing the area.

Loren Heal (Diary) Wednesday, August 12th at 10:05AM EST (link)

A word here, a label there, and the next thing you know rumors get started. We don’t want our rapport with the MSM to be damaged by ugly rumors, so just remember that we’re an unruly, angry mob.

Glad that’s settled.


Join the Concord Project, and follow @lheal, if you dare.

good points 'rates, and I would also add that FedEx and UPS can't compete with USPS

Mike gamecock DeVine (Diary) Wednesday, August 12th at 1:03PM EST (link)

with respect to universal home delivery of regular mail, nor should they, and I do favor continuing the constitutionally prescribed government service for many reasons.

Mike DeVine’s Examiner.com, Charlotte Observer and The Minority Report columns
“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

 
 
 
 
 
 

Socrates, I think all you have to do

MrsNachos (Diary) Wednesday, August 12th at 7:05PM EST (link)

is look at the State run health cares to see that this is going to fail. A long time ago, I wrote a piece on Tncare here, that I’ve since deleted, but the gist was that it failed miserably. As they all do. So we can either go as we are and try to find other, more feasible solutions, or fail miserably and have a health quo that is considerably lower than it was before this sucky plan.

Http://blueshelled.com

 

Or how about Amtrak as an example?

bk (Diary) Wednesday, August 12th at 7:47PM EST (link)

Let’s see if I can pull some funding highlights from the “Public Funding” section of this Wikipedia article.

1971 – $40M in cash and $100M in loans; to break even by 1974.
1981 – Now up to $1.25B/year in “free” federal money.
1986 – Reagan gets it down to $600M/year.
1997 – Over $1B/yr for 5 years; to be off Uncle Sam’s teat by 2003 or shut down.
2004 – $1.25B
2005 – $1.25B
2006 – $1.4B
2007 – $2B
2008 – $13B over 5 years

Amtrak’s 2008 Annual Report says they had a huge jump in ticket revenue in 2008 – all the way up from $1.52B to $1.73B. Woo hoo! That brings ticket revenue within $1B of their annual subsidy! It says total revenue in FY08 was $2.45B and total expenses were $3.41. Once again, less than a $1B gap! They’ll be self-sufficient real soon now!!

BTW they paid over $265M in interest in FY08 after whittling their total debt down to a mere $3.2B or so and the average age of their cars is 25 years. The “Outlook” section on p30 of the report notes that “the Company may not have sufficient funds to operate through the end of fiscal year 2009.” But worry? Nah! Congress and the President will be ready to help, so I’m sure a big bailout investment from us taxpayers will be coming along very soon.

So when anyone in Washington says (fill in the blank) is an “investment” that will pay off in the long run, you’d better grab a jar of Vaseline and pick a comfortable position, because you’re going to be feeling it for a looooong time to come.

dang it - I messed up a link

bk (Diary) Wednesday, August 12th at 7:48PM EST (link)