Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (16110)	4/5/2010 8:39:07 AM
From: Lane3	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

The plan with and W/O the PO... Exactly. But that's not relevant to our discussion. Comparing the proposal with the PO against the proposal without the PO, does not inform the issue. If you want to determine whether some proposal saves money, you compare it against the status quo, not some other proposal. What? I try explaining the reasoning step by step and you don't get it. You don't even bother to critique it. You just blow it off as "fanciful." I try an analogy and you are bewildered. I don't know if what's going on with you is resistance to considering anything outside your predispositions, passive aggression, or whether you just don't have the training to effect a reality check on the messages you are fed. I will try another analogy. If that doesn't work, I give up. Say you're buying a new car to save on gasoline so you look at a Ferrari, a Hummer, and an Accord. Obviously you would save money buying the Accord relative to the Ferrari and the Hummer. But if the car you currently own is a Prius, then you wouldn't save money on gasoline by buying the Accord. The car you already own uses less gasoline. The Accord is not cheaper. Likewise, you would save money choosing the proposal with the PO over the proposal without the PO. But that doesn't mean that you would save money on the PO over the status quo ante.