The Death of Civilization

Here’s how they die, at least in the modern, internet era:  pitching romantic vacations in the hopes that someone might wind up pregnant:

Denmark has a lot of things going for it. Last year, the UN’s World Happiness Report crowned it the globe’s happiest country, citing the nation’s commitment to maternity leave, gender equality, biking, and drinking lots of wine when it’s cold outside.

Its economy is also tops, chugging out $211 billion in annual GDP despite its relatively small population of 5.6 million. Economic inequality? Not a problem. Income distributes more evenly there than most places.

But Denmark has a sex problem. (Re-evaluating that happiness ranking already?)

Well, it’s not exactly a sex problem, per se. It’s more like a baby problem. According to government statistics, Denmark posted a birth rate of 10 per 1,000 residents in 2013 — its lowest in decades. The nation’s birthrate was  9.9 in 1983…

And, so, a travel agency has worked a “Do It For Denmark” campaign – at the link you can view the mildly NSFW ad pitch.  Its all very cute and funny, but it also reveals the underlying problem.  For all our wealth and for all our civilizational obsession with sex, we ain’t having kids.  And here’s the problem – if a people doesn’t create new people, it dies.  Funny how that works, huh?

We have no stigma attached to shacking up without marriage.  No one would dare call a child born out of wedlock a bastard.  Our popular culture is saturated with sexual references.  We have a “hook up” culture among our young which appears to hold that sexual activity is just part of a movie/dinner date night.  Everyone is encouraged to have as much sex as possible…and yet birth rates around the world have cratered.  Often to the point where some nations are already losing population year by year.  What gives?

For most people it would all be a great mystery.  It won’t be for some – those of us who either back when already knew or who have discovered the truth: when you separate sex out from its marital and procreative functions (via pre-marital sex and various forms of birth control, plus abortion) you will get lots more sex, but you won’t get sex which has any actual purpose in life…and you’ll also get people who have grown to believe that sex is just a thing of itself, having no purpose beyond the actual sex act.  And then you’ll get cratering birth rates, welfare States in trouble (all welfare States are built upon the requirement of a steadily increasing population) and absurd ad campaigns to convince people to have sex with a purpose.

As I’ve said elsewhere, this is just the end of a civilization – a dying, liberal civilization which proposed to make everything just great for everyone as soon as we cast off all the burdens of the old, Judeo-Christian civilization.  Well, with abortion on demand, same-sex marriage and, now, human bodies being burned for fuel, I think we can say that the very last shreds of the old civilization have been cast off.  This is now the liberal civilization long dreamed of.  Here it is.  Do you like it?  Well, don’t get too used to it – its already dead.  It’ll be replaced – by a Judeo-Christian civilization…where people will not only know how to have sex, but will know what it’s for without having to be prompted by a slick ad campaign.

 

Advertisements

59 thoughts on “The Death of Civilization

  1. Amazona March 27, 2014 / 3:08 pm

    I wonder what an anti-abortion campaign in Denmark might do to the birth rate.

    Of course, it would not be politically correct and would upset Libs, so I guess they are stuck with this take-a-trip-and-get-pregnant ploy. In the US it would take-a-trip-and-get-pregnant-and-then-have-your-boss-be-forced-to-pay-for-your-abortion.

    BTW, in a slightly similar vein, have you noticed the absolute absence of any Complicit Agenda Media ridicule of the screeches from the Supreme Court demonstrators that not paying for contraception is the same as “denying ACCESS to contraception”? There’s a pretty long list of things that are not paid for by employers, ranging from gasoline to food to rent to cell phones to clothes to hair cuts to tattoos to whatever, and it’s pretty obvious that ACCESS to these things has not been compromised, yet the lapdog media is refusing to point this out.

  2. 02casper March 27, 2014 / 8:11 pm

    Mark,
    Denmark has a happy, healthy, well educated, prosperous population and you somehow think that is a bad thing?

    • M. Noonan March 27, 2014 / 10:38 pm

      They’re dying out. That is the point. That you refuse to see it just shows that you are willfully blind to reality. Can’t be happy when you no longer exist, ya dig? And with suicide rate massively higher than, say, Greece, then maybe having lots of sex and cradle to grave welfare ain’t all its cracked up to be.

      • tiredoflibbs March 28, 2014 / 7:38 pm

        “How many biological kids do you have Mark?”

        Irrelevant as usual drone j6206.

      • 02casper March 28, 2014 / 8:25 pm

        “M. Noonan Post authorMarch 28, 2014 at 6:16 pm

        Zero – because I, for a while, bought the liberal bullsh**”

        Are you saying libs don’t have children? Funny, because I’m a lib and I have kids and grandkids. It had nothing to do with political philosophy.

      • Amazona March 28, 2014 / 9:08 pm

        Oh, casper, when will you learn to just shut the hell up! One might think that after a few dozen times of being subjected to scathing contempt and ridicule you would at least learn to stop for a moment and look at what you write before you hit the “post comment” button, to see if your blathering is in any way related to anything that was said.

        But no, you are so blissed out by your own ignorance and utter inability to process the written word, you seem to think your brain farts are brilliant just because they are yours.

        “Are you saying libs don’t have children?”

        Short answer: No.

        Longer answer: No, he did not say that. No one said that.

        Longer than that answer: He actually cited the birth rate in the nation he referenced. Even you, in the murky intellectual fog in which you bumble about, ought to realize that a birth rate is about now many babies are born. Mark even helped you out by explaining what the birth rate means: “The other thing is that Denmark’s total fertility rate is 1.8 – meaning each woman has 1.8 children.”

        Hint: Talking about women in a liberal country having children is NOT the same thing as saying liberals do not have children.

        Duh

    • Amazona March 28, 2014 / 1:53 pm

      Only the all-time biggest winner of the Emily Litella Clueless Blathering Award could have written casper’s post.

      Did Mark write the quote he included in his thread post? No, his link is to an article by someone else. Duh.

      Did Mark quote anyone saying that anyone, anyone at all, “somehow thinks” that being a happy, healthy, well educated and prosperous nation “is a bad thing”? Of course not. Duh.

      Did Mark himself say that he “somehow thinks” that being a happy, healthy, well educated and prosperous nation “is a bad thing”? Of course not. Duh.

      Did Mark come up with a plan to encourage Danes to reproduce more? Of course not. Duh.

      Poor cappy, so eager to feel like he is relevant, so desperate to belong to a discussion, that he just blurts out nonsense like this.

  3. 02casper March 27, 2014 / 10:50 pm

    Mark,
    They have a birth rate of 10.22 per thousand and a death rate of 10.23 per thousand as per the CIA World fact book. That’s not dying out. That’s staying even. And their suicide rate is lower than the U.S., unless you include Greenland which has the highest suicide rate in the world.

    • M. Noonan March 28, 2014 / 1:17 am

      There is no need to explain that because there is nothing to explain – its clearly a bullsh** study designed to advance an anti-gun and anti-conservative agenda. The fact that Denmark – hardly a hotbed of either gun ownership or conservatism – has a suicide rate in line with the United States proves conclusively that any assertion that high gun ownership and/or conservative views are more prone to suicide is a bit of dimwitted nonsense that no one with any sense could possibly believe.

      The other thing is that Denmark’s total fertility rate is 1.8 – meaning each woman has 1.8 children. Each woman has to have 2.1 children (meaning that each set of 10 women must have 21 children) in order for population to remain stable. Birth and death rates are meaningless as a way of telling us where a population is headed – how many people are born tells us that, because no matter how good we get at extending life, if we don’t have new life coming in, the population will eventually die out.

    • Amazona March 28, 2014 / 2:13 pm

      Oh, I am quite sure that casper does love his “Science” Daily reports—after all, he can read how the real reason the earth’s temperature has not gone up for the last 13 years (which is what they admit to) is that “unprecedented” increases in trade winds have driven all that new heat into the ocean. But (cue ominous music…) IT WILL BE BAAAACCKKKK!!!! Yep, according to casper’s go-to source of what is fact, one of these days when the winds slow down, that heat will bounce right back into the atmosphere and boy, will we be sorry then!

      “Deep Oceans Can Mask Global Warming for Decade-Long Periods.
      Pacific trade winds stall global surface warming … for now”

      OK, well, we might have to wait “decades” for this to happen. I wonder if this will be preceded by “unprecedented” slowing of the trade winds—and who gets to decide what is “unprecedented”, anyway. Isn’t that kind of a vague and subjective word for a “scientific” report? But at least now we know, or at least the caspers of the world know, that global warming is still going on, kind of, maybe, but being hidden in the waters of the oceans, though it might not be happening at all but be “stalled”. So is it going on but being “masked”, or is it “stalled”? And if it is not happening, but IS stalled, then who says it will start up again?

      Yeah, THIS is the kind of “science” that seems to really impress cappy. Sadly, it is probably also the same kind of “science” he teaches to his poor students.

      And it is the same kind of “science” that tries to link mental instability to belief in the Constitution and ownership of guns. Which comes first, cappy? Do you have to be nuts to think the Constitution of the United States is the best (and only legal) way to govern the nation, or does that belief drive the formerly rational to suicide? Do the craziest or most depressed people buy guns, or does having guns suck the sane right out of you?

      I can’t thank you enough for pointing out to us where you get some of your wackadoo ideas. It’s a little bit scary that ANYONE can swallow this crap, much less regurgitate it to show off for others, but really scary that this is what is ingested and digested by a teacher of young people.

  4. 02casper March 28, 2014 / 8:42 am

    “There is no need to explain that because there is nothing to explain – its clearly a bullsh** study designed to advance an anti-gun and anti-conservative agenda”

    Interesting, considering that the statistics used are all available on line.

    • M. Noonan March 28, 2014 / 3:00 pm

      Casper,

      But if the study were true then Denmark would have a remarkably lower suicide rate than the United States. It doesn’t. Remember, the thing being alleged is a correlation between gun ownership and conservatism and suicide…those dumb, bitter-clingers! They don’t even realize how miserable they are? See! Look! They commit suicide all the time! But it just isn’t the case, because if it were the case then every place with low suicide would be strictly gun controlled and liberal in politics. The most suicidal city in the United States is Las Vegas – voted for Obama. So, I now correlate high suicide rates to voting for dimwitted community organizers. That is just as valid as your linked article.

  5. tiredoflibbs March 28, 2014 / 12:24 pm

    “They have a birth rate of 10.22 per thousand and a death rate of 10.23 per thousand as per the CIA World fact book. That’s not dying out.”

    Really? Last I checked 10.23 is greater than 10.22.

    Let’s see, Denmark’s population is 5.59 million so that translates into 57130 births and 57186 deaths. That is not population growth, that is population decline or NEGATIVE population growth.

    For a teacher, your analytical skills are dismal. You just support “facts” and statistics that you agree with and push your poor agenda.

    “Denmark has a happy, healthy, well educated, prosperous population and you somehow think that is a bad thing?”

    This statement is completely stupid (not to mention complete opinion) and flies against the fact that there is negative population growth. Not to mention, it is completely unrelated to Mark’s point.

    • 02casper March 28, 2014 / 7:23 pm

      “Let’s see, Denmark’s population is 5.59 million so that translates into 57130 births and 57186 deaths. That is not population growth, that is population decline or NEGATIVE population growth.”

      By your figures Denmark’s population is being reduced by 56 people a year. At that rate, The country will be completely depopulated in 99,821 years. I can see why you and Mark are concerned.

      • tiredoflibbs March 28, 2014 / 7:37 pm

        “At that rate, The country will be completely depopulated in 99,821 years. ”

        Oh, goody you can perform simple mathematical equations. But it took me to point out to you.

        Uh, two things –

        1) the population rate will either keep declining or improve. But a society that has a healthy and prosperous population would not have a death rate higher than its birthrate. Right now it is still negative population growth – something you completely missed with your – “Denmark has a happy, healthy, well educated, prosperous population and you somehow think that is a bad thing?” – statement. Only a fool would think the rate would stay the same. Either way, any population will die out with negative population growth.

        2) if there were the same negative population growth of any animal species, the left would be up in arms about it – something that is on display everyday in California – worse than what Mark has done.

        But do continue to spin and miss the obvious in order to make yourself feel good.

      • 02casper March 28, 2014 / 8:01 pm

        “Oh, goody you can perform simple mathematical equations. But it took me to point out to you.”

        You pointed out nothing I didn’t know. The difference between 10.23 and 10.22 is statistically insignificant. By your figures Denmark can keep a stable population by allowing a bus load of people in every year,

      • Amazona March 28, 2014 / 9:25 pm

        So by the time Mark’s commentary found its way through the maze of your brain, what you got from the bits that did not fall into the void along the way was that he is CONCERNED about the birth rate in Denmark.

        OK. I didn’t get “concerned” out of it—or fear or racism, either. Uh-oh—–more staples of RRL rhetoric off the table.

        An objective observation on the effects upon a nation when its birth rate drops is merely that. He might have gone into the repercussions of this in a society dependent upon the redistribution of wealth, such as we are seeing in France, which has had to import people from other countries (and more than just a busload, you coy little thing, you) to support its growing Dependent Class, people who refuse to assimilate and who are in the process of destroying the very nature and character of the country.

        But you might have found some other emotion-based word to describe your inability to even IMAGINE anything that is not emotion-based. You certainly would have been compelled to post some nonsense about such a post. It’s what you do.

        You know, your pattern is quite transparent. Lacking any real ideas of your own, you lurk until someone posts something in which a word resonates in the cavity of your brain bucket, and then you scurry to the keyboard to memorialize the vague impression you got from poorly grasped concepts. You quite obviously strive only to be a speed bump, nothing more than the annoying little mosquito in the room, noticed only because of the faint buzzing.

      • M. Noonan March 29, 2014 / 1:52 am

        Casper,

        You are not understanding that as the birth rate continues to drop, the death rate starts to overtake it at an increasingly rapid pace. Japan’s population peaked in 2008 – since then, the population has declined by about a quarter million, even though the birth rate (8 per 1,000) is not too far off the death rate (9 per 1,000). You can calculate that out and say “Japan will run out of people a bazillion years), but it doesn’t work like that…because the birth rates keep falling and the death rates keep rising as the aging population starts to die off at a faster pace (the Japanese have about the longest life span of any people on earth – but once you start getting people up to 85 and 90 years old, it just becomes harder and harder to keep them alive – and, of course, who is to take care of all these old folks?). If things keep on as they are, then Japan’s population will be down to about 75 million by 2100…but if they keep degrading at the pace they have been, then the population will be in the 50 million range. So it will be in Denmark – first a slowly growing population, then population stability, then slow decline, then rapid decline. This isn’t the first time this has happened, after all – it happened in ancient Greece and Rome, for instance…people stopped having kids…when the barbarians came into the Roman Empire it wasn’t because they became militarily more adept than the Romans (they weren’t), but because the Romans simply had no one to fight against them…their manpower was too low, and what they had was either ground down slaves in the countryside or welfare bums in the cities.

        Demographic catastrophe stalks the whole world, of course – there are about a score of nations which still have a healthy birth rate, but even they are rapidly declining. The birth rate among American natives recently dropped below replacement level- immigration keeps things up to scratch, but here’s the kicker: most of the “feeder” nations for our immigration are also rapidly dropping to below replacement level…meaning they will shortly stop having surplus youth they can send our way.

        To me, this is a symptom of moral collapse – people who no longer really believe in anything are just giving up on life. Yes, even the Muslim nations – for all the fanaticism of the Islamists, even Islam is at or below replacement level, depending on country (a few of them are still above it – but, once again, rapidly declining). That is why I titled this “death of civilization” – because that is what it is. Civilization is dying; our senile, exhausted, liberal civilization has thrown up the sponge.

      • tiredoflibbs March 29, 2014 / 5:42 am

        wow, cappy, 58 people or as you put it, “a bus load of people”, dying per year is insignificant. Coming from a liberal whose shares the regurgitated talking point, “if it (any liberal government action) will save one life it will be worth it”, you sure are insensitive or desperate to extract yourself from a losing argument.

        “You pointed out nothing I didn’t know.”

        Hardly, don’t flatter yourself – you continued to make the faulty argument of a “healthy and prosperous population” while according to you Denmark can “outsource” from other nations to maintain its population.

        Your desperation to try and badmouth Mark so you can fit in at the other blog is your downfall when logic and simple reading comprehension is required.

      • Amazona March 29, 2014 / 10:32 am

        tired, I had forgotten about the other blog, that anti-B4V grease spot in the road, or that casper has finally found common ground with someone. So it did not occur to me that he was skulking around here looking for a chance to lurch in and scatter some of his mental debris because he thought it might give him cred with the outcasts and misfits.

        But it makes sense. I have often wondered at his utter lack of dignity, his obliviousness to being scorned and ridiculed. I thought it was because this is his life, because this is how he gets through every day, by being oblivious to how he and his blathering are received. But you make a good point, that in this case he is willing to expose himself to even more scathing contempt because it might impress the crowd for which he has had to settle.

      • tiredoflibbs March 29, 2014 / 6:29 pm

        “I have often wondered at his utter lack of dignity, his obliviousness to being scorned and ridiculed.”

        Amazona, cappy pretends to take the “high moral ground” with his claims and preachings of civility and how he would “not stoop to such treatment” of bloggers here. He is just another two-faced individual. While at the other blog, he is just as condescending and hateful as any other typical progressive. He attacks us there while trying to be our friend here.

      • 02casper March 29, 2014 / 9:44 pm

        Mark,
        You really are Mr. Gloom and Doom aren’t you? By most measures Denmark is doing pretty well, but because they aren’t making as many babies as you think they should, their country is on the verge of collapse. Of course, in your world, any country that doesn’t come up to your standards (which is all of them) is failing. Tough to be you.

      • M. Noonan March 30, 2014 / 2:10 am

        By most measures, the Titanic was doing pretty well up until 11:40pm, April 14th, 1912. There was also no problem with that hill in Washington at 10:36 am on the 22nd. That is the thing about problems – they tend to go un-noticed until the water is sloshing over the forecastle or the mud is crashing through the living room window.

        Look, if you want to pretend that everything is fine, that is your business – but you are being willfully blind to the facts.

      • tiredoflibbs March 30, 2014 / 6:34 am

        “but you are being willfully blind to the facts.”

        That is what cappy does. When something doesn’t fit into his little reality, he pretends it’s not there.

        He cites some leftist organization’s study on “happiness” or some such silly attempt at quantifying socialism. As usual, the study and he does not look at the big picture. He mindlessly regurgitates the “happy, healthy and prosperous” propaganda but fails to see that the population is in DECLINE with a population that is getting older (average age over 40). The death rate will continue to climb as the population ages – for some reason this is too far of a reach for cappy’s limited analytical ability.

        If Denmark itself felt as cappy does, then they would not be putting out the ad. I would not get too upset over the fact that cappy can’t see the big picture in most cases. He rather content with the present snapshot of carefully crafted reality created by his idols.

      • Amazona March 30, 2014 / 9:25 am

        If you peel off the layers of casper’s obtuseness—–and that will take a while because there are so many, you eventually come to the conclusion that all he IS is layers of obtuseness, cloaked in coy pretense at civility, but with no real core—–what you come up with, as in his snotty comment about Mark’s observations of Denmark being nothing more than Mark condemning people for not being what he thinks they should be, is the same basic fatal flaw of Liberalism.

        That is, the lack of understanding of where money comes from.

        It’s like bloch telling us that “wealth is a finite resource”, as if it was just created, somehow, all at once, and can be found and picked up and used, passed around and redistributed, but cannot be created.

        Denmark right now is fat and happy (figuratively speaking—–PLEASE, cappy, don’t drown us with links to studies on the muscle mass or body fat ratio of Danes!) because, like all Ponzi schemes, what they have going is still working. And that is great, peachy, I am happy for them all.

        But the health, as well as the wealth, of society is dependent on maintaining a certain ratio of workers to those too young to work and those too old. When that ratio starts to change, it is obvious (except to the knee-jerk speed bump mentality that skulks around looking for something to challenge or ridicule) that the society itself is going to go through some changes. Factor in the amount of money needed for other government programs, and the wheels fall off even sooner.

        With understanding of the forces at play, and advance planning, these changes need not be catastrophic. It may be possible to adapt to a smaller workforce, a smaller revenue stream to the nation, a smaller source of goods and services.

        The problem comes from having those of a former generation dependent on the promises made to them, of access to money, goods and services which are no longer available.

        And here we come back to the caspers and the bloches, those who simply cannot or do not grasp the basics of economics. To make it as basic as possible, try this: (Warning to the caspers: The following is only an illustration. It is only an example of a concept. Calm down. ) Let’s say it takes 10 working Danes, making average salaries, to contribute enough of their earnings to support one non-working Dane, plus the nifty services the government provides “for free”. When the number of working Danes decreases, and here is where the Lefties become befuddled and lost, the amount of revenue to support that one non-working Dane, and all those government freebies, is decreased.

        In other words, the only way to meet the needs of the Dependent Class is to maintain the numbers in the Productive Class.

        There are two ways to do this: Breed your own replacements or import them from other countries.

      • Amazona March 30, 2014 / 9:38 am

        “cappy pretends to take the “high moral ground” with his claims and preachings of civility and how he would “not stoop to such treatment” of bloggers here. ”

        Yet he seeks out those whose personal attacks here were so vile, so vicious, so filthy, that they could not be tolerated. This is the table where he chooses to sit, telling us that these are the people with whom he identifies, with whom he agrees, the people he likes and admires.

        He would (or maybe I am assuming too much here………) object to someone on a blog calling his wife a c***, but he seems to find that, and other language in personal attacks on his Blog of Choice quite acceptable.

        He’s always had that smarmy, Eddie-Haskell-to-the-nth-degree quality about him, the coy ducking of the chins and fluttering of eyelashes over downturned eyes while at the same time being snotty and nasty and petty.

  6. Amazona March 28, 2014 / 2:36 pm

    People like Dahlia Lithwick might not be harbingers of the death of civilization, but they sure do explain the decline of our nation.

    From “The Goldberg Files” by Jonah Goldberg:

    “I loved this bit from Dahlia Lithwick, Slate’s esteemed legal correspondent (hat tip RP):

    I have been fascinated by Christine O’Donnell’s constitutional worldview since her debate with her opponent Chris Coons last week. O’Donnell explained that “when I go to Washington, D.C., the litmus test by which I cast my vote for every piece of legislation that comes across my desk will be whether or not it is constitutional.” How weird is that, I thought. Isn’t it a court’s job to determine whether or not something is, in fact, constitutional? And isn’t that sort of provided for in, well, the Constitution?

    This is awesome. It’s not just that Lithwick dismisses a perfectly sensible and mainstream argument. It’s not just that she is ignorant of the contents of the actual Constitution (it does not provide for the Supreme Court serving as the either sole or final arbiter of what is constitutional). It’s not that she seems to have forgotten Marbury v. Madison. It’s not that she cannot grasp the idea that some legislator might not want to vote for unconstitutional legislation. No, what really makes this great is the absolute bunkered pomposity behind her instinctual certainty that anyone who disagrees with her bouillabaisse of ignorance and ideology must be “weird.” ”

    BTW, I have been saying for years that this litmus test should be mandatory for every legislator. I have even suggested that every proposed bill must be accompanied by a brief explaining how and why it complies with the Constitution. I guess Dahlia would have a hard time figuring that out, too. Or would call me names.

    But just to illustrate her intellectual superiority…………

    • Retired Spook March 28, 2014 / 2:56 pm

      Amazona,

      What she’s essentially saying is akin to me robbing a bank with the excuse that it’s up to the police to determine if it’s illegal. This all stems from, as I’ve said before, the underlying premise of Progressivism that, the Tenth Amendment aside, the federal government is allowed to do ANYTHING that is not specifically prohibited by the Constitution.

  7. Retired Spook March 28, 2014 / 2:49 pm

    Completely OT, but just too funny not to share.

    Perhaps it’s Democrats who don’t understand the Internet and the fact that when they say something on camera, it’s preserved for the ages. One really has to wonder, at this point, if Reid is in an advanced stage of dementia or is just a lying sack of sh*t.

    • Amazona March 28, 2014 / 2:53 pm

      It’s not the insanity, or the lies, that come out of Reid’s mouth. It is the fact that Dems simply do not care.

  8. Amazona March 28, 2014 / 2:52 pm

    “One really has to wonder, at this point, if Reid is in an advanced stage of dementia or is just a lying sack of sh*t.”

    To quote, or at least paraphrase, the smartest woman in the world, “At this point, does it really matter?”

  9. Retired Spook March 30, 2014 / 11:21 am

    Talk about the death of civilization; my home page has a window that lists the most popular searches on any given day. The NUMBER ONE search today is “Food Stamp Calculator”. Welcome to the Obama economy — sad, really sad.

  10. Amazona March 30, 2014 / 12:55 pm

    On the other hand, I keep opening pages that contain big flashy ads for refinancing homes, with the banner headline that OBAMA has lowered interest rates!!!!!!!

    Every time I see an ad for lowered interest rates, and/or refinancing a home, Obama gets full credit for being THE GUY, the hero who has single-handedly made it possible to get a lower interest rate. Him, himself, all by himself. Truly The One We Have All Been Waiting For.

    What a guy.

    More to the point, why are all these sites pimping Obama as the creator of lower interest rates?

  11. tiredoflibbs March 30, 2014 / 6:10 pm

    You want to discuss track records, watty?

    cappy claims: “Meanwhile, because of Obamacare somewhere between 12 and 15 million Americans are now insured. No bad.”

    You respond with: “tired, the best source for data on signups is http://acasignups.net.”

    From acasignups.net:
    “Are you a professional statistician or analyst?
    Not at all. I’m not doing actual analysis or true projections; I’m just plugging a bunch of data into a spreadsheet and adding it all up.”
    and
    “I do not guarantee that any of their data is accurate, but I do guarantee that any of their data that I enter into the spreadsheet is as accurate as I can make it given my limited time and resources.”

    The best source? You’re kidding right? Hysterical!!!! Only in proggy fantasy land are those figures correct!
    You want to base your track record on that? While blasting Mark for pointing out that America has moved away from make (most manufacturing is outside this country), mine (obama forcing coal out and the environmentalists have done the rest) and grow (farming is being hurt by liberal tax and inheritance policies; California is especially hurting due to liberal policies plus wacky environmental laws).

    • 02casper March 30, 2014 / 7:52 pm

      So tired, what are the correct figures?

      • tiredoflibbs March 30, 2014 / 9:45 pm

        The White House claims 6 million. But of that we already know that 2-4 million lost their original insurance because of obamacare.

      • 02casper March 30, 2014 / 9:57 pm

        tiredoflibbs March 30, 2014 at 9:45 pm

        “The White House claims 6 million.”

        The six million figure are those that added insurance through the exchanges. It doesn’t include those on medicaid or who added insurance through other avenues’

        “But of that we already know that 2-4 million lost their original insurance because of obamacare.”

        How many of them would have lost coverage anyway. The individual insurance market has always cancelled a lot of plans.

      • 02casper March 31, 2014 / 7:18 pm

        tiredoflibbs March 30, 2014 at 10:33 pm

        “Even more info from the Washington Post on the highly questionable six million figure and their conclusion states that obamacare is not working.”

        It’s not the Washington Post, It’s Ed Rogers a Republican operative, writing an opinion piece in the Washington Post. Interesting reading though.

  12. tiredoflibbs March 31, 2014 / 7:59 pm

    It is interesting to note that HHS doesn’t know how many of the uninsured have signed up for obamacare. And yet, some amateur web designer is filling out a spreadsheet, in his spare time, with dubious data and the mindless drones take his figures as gospel.

    It is also interesting to note that the Denver Post lists this amateur as an “independent statistician”. Yet the amateur states that he is not a statistician but a web designer.

    http://www.denverpost.com/nationalpolitics/ci_25365343/how-many-people-have-gotten-insurance-because-obamacare

    I guess if I recorded temperature and climate data, I could be called an “independent climatologist”.

    Let me say specifically that the last statement was in jest so watty won’t get his panties in a bunch if I later claim it was a joke without stating so now.

    • 02casper March 31, 2014 / 8:45 pm

      tired,
      No one is taking his figures as gospel. They are estimates. And exactly what data do you find dubious? The links to all of the data is there. What Gaba has done is searched for data on the web and added it to a spreadsheet, something that anyone with a little knowledge of Internet searches and spreadsheets could do. That doesn’t make him a statistician or an expert in any area. However, he seems to be the only one making the effort at this time to estimate the number of ACA signups at this time. If you have a better source, or have have a problem with his data, please let me know. Personally, I’ve checked several of the links and the math he’s used. I haven’t caught any mistakes, although that doesn’t mean there aren’t any.

      • tiredoflibbs April 2, 2014 / 5:47 am

        “No one is taking his figures as gospel”

        Uh, you, Watty and any other who use them as a source for their assertions.

        Your checking of the data is not encouraging since your record of faulty analytical ability says otherwise.

        He is the only one estimating ACA sign ups. Remind me who made it a point that one should not look at “single sources” when it comes to debate or discussion? Just because he is the only source doesn’t mean he is correct, especially when he says “I can’t guarantee the accuracy of the data”.

        You can’t catch any mistakes when you are not looking for them. You ignore his disclaimer, take the data as gospel and continue to ignore your requirements of expertise and avoiding single sources.

    • M. Noonan April 1, 2014 / 1:32 am

      Let’s put it this way – if Obama’s people could in some way, shape or form show that two million or more uninsured people had actually purchased ObamaCare plans, they would release the hard data to back it up because then they could at least say, “millions of previously uninsured people” now have health insurance – and what sort of rat-bastard, racist, sexist, homophobic, war-on-woman GOPer would you have to be to want to undo that? The fact that we don’t get something like that speaks volumes about what is really going on in the exchanges.

      Forbes has an article regarding a Rand Corp study which estimates that only about 1/3 of all enrollees were previously uninsured. The guesstimate (guessed because Obama won’t release the hard data) is that 80% of those who “signed up” have actually paid. So, 80% of 6 million (if that figure is even remotely accurate) means 4.8 million paid; 1/3 of that is 1.6 million…we’ve spent all this money and we’ve managed to insure, at best, 1.6 million (that is not even 5% of the total uninsured)…but even that doesn’t cover it, because of that 1.6 million at least 550,000 better be young-healthy or all those people who did buy will find their premiums skyrocketing. And all of this is predicated upon the 6 million figure being correct, which is likely isn’t (another kicker to this – CBO scoring was based upon most of those signing up not being previously insured…which means the actuarial tables used to determine premiums are already in a cocked hat).

      Its a failed program – and it is just going to get worse.

      • Retired Spook April 1, 2014 / 8:59 am

        what is really going on in the exchanges.

        Mark, there’s also something else going on that’s getting almost no news coverage. There are at least a couple, maybe more, lawsuits winding their way through the federal courts arguing that the law doesn’t allow for giving subsidies to people who enroll through federal exchanges. This is actually a pretty big deal, because, when the omission was discovered in 2012, the IRS simply changed the law WRT subsidies. It was like they were saying, “well, we meant to put that in there”, so they just “deemed” it to be in there. Look at the effect THAT has on the enrollment numbers:

        Of the 4.2 million people who selected private health plans from October through February, 2.6 million obtained coverage through the federal exchange, and four-fifths of them qualified for subsidies that reduce their premiums. Without subsidies, many would have been unable to afford insurance.

        The real kicker, though, is that the number of uninsured NEVER falls below 30 million. The two main selling points of ObamaCare were covering people with pre-existing conditions and covering at least most of the 45 or so million people without insurance. So 2/3 of the uninsured will not ever be insured, and, while insurance companies are being forced to ensure people with pre-existing conditions, there are already stories about ways they’ve found to get around it. It’s no different that forcing casualty insurance companies to insure drivers AFTER they’ve had an accident.

Comments are closed.