Arguing with Idiots, Government Costs

[splicedenergy]

Yeah Glenn, try taking it away from them

[hobbitno12]

msnbc should replace keith oberman with the idiot :P

[LesPaulCustom79]

In Georgia, medical malpractice insurance cost doctors and hospitals a large percentage of income. This one factor is constantly driving up healthcare cost. The Dumblecrats will not even discuss putting tort reform in the current healthcare bill to reduce malpractice insurance cost. WHY? Because Obama Admin. made one of their shady backroom deals with the big insurance companies.

[allemosmustdie209]

It seems to me that the book was written for idiots. Anyone with an iota of intellgence would be able make their own arguments without the aid of Beck's book. And it seems to me he does INDEED twist statistics because most of a 400% increase in spending can be accounted for inflation. Remember when tickets to the movies use to cost a quarter? Well now they cost more than 10$ Thats more than 400% for the idiots that actually take Glen Beck seriously.

[thisisjoshman]

Wow, so you didn't hear about two seconds later when he said "in inflation adjusted dollars?" That's some pretty laser-guided ignorance you have there.

[allemosmustdie209]

How would Glen Beck know how much governments at the state and local level spend? Not all of them spend the same amount, some places get a very good return in their investments while others cover the costs of other regions. Can one honestly expect Glen Beck of all people to know something like this?

[thisisjoshman]

Considering the fact that all those facts would be public record and he has a staff of researchers at his disposal, it isn't that unbelievable. Besides, he cites reliable sources for pretty much every claim he makes. So it's not that Glenn Beck claims to know something, it's that he claims someone with far more credibility knows it.

[thisisjoshman]

As I happen to own a copy of Arguing with Idiots, I flipped open to the pages he references in this video. Sure enough, there was the claim. 495%. I flipped over to the citation page for that claim, and found that his source was the United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. He also provided a URL to their website, but it's kind of long, so I'd really rather not type it out.

Sounds like a group that would know about that sort of thing, eh?

[nurbSoldier]

@allemosmustdie209 Oh, its real simple. It's called 'averaging'

[pretzelzetzel]

these are infuriating. listening to glenn beck 'debate' these fake opponents is like playing a video game on easy mode with cheat codes. why would anyone even bother? why does beck even bother?

[videohaure]

Brilliant... I love these.

[ASRIBEIRIO]

Apparently Glenn Beck missed the rapid increase in life span and the further inclusions given through medicare making the original calculation null.

My god this man is fucking stupid.

[Pschoch1]

The point is about how much it costs and how we can't afford it. I don't see the rapid increase you were talking about. I only saw a gradual one. At least from 1975-2007.

[ASRIBEIRIO]

Uh, when it passed we were talking about age 70 as our target. Now we have 78 and at the time Glenn Beck is referring to it was 75. Let me rephrase my "rapid increase in life span". I really meant, adding 5 years to an average life span once you hit the 70 mark is a tremendous medical achievement whether anyone realizes it since we are pushing well beyond are biological limitations that that point. And most importantly, tremendously expensive. It's incredibly expensive to maintain an old person.

[jstanworth]

So you buy into the argument that we should kill old people instead of paying for them? And we wouldn't have had that tremendous medical achievement without private healthcare, because the government won't spend as much on R&D. Personally I'd like to live actively until I'm 120, but we can't get there without a lot more R&D dollars.

[jjprez]

These are great!!! :D