Those Who Rate U.S. Health Care System Good or Excellent Up To 49%

I don't think there is any possible way to get a survey when polling the masses that tells more than their opinion at that particular time. The only thing 'scientific' is that it is maybe an accurrate poll of opinion but it is not science which details the fact or fiction of problems.

In the 15th century, if the general masses were polled and asked, "Do you believe the earth is round or is the earth flat?" In a free speach society without persecution or coercsion.... it is possible opinions might vary but even then the majority might have said the earth is flat' because that is the best that they knew.

There are many people I may recognize by name.... but barely know. A poll which questioned me about them would most likely have plenty of 'don't know' or positive response based upon what little I did know. But acquaint me with their names, their occupations and contributions, their values, their lifestyles and I'm more likely to have a mix of opinions ......still based upon limited information, some positive, some maybe negative. What changed? First of all, I'm inclined to consider individuals in a positive way and my preference as to what I read, what entertains, the news programs I watch may be the only and limited sources by which I recognize the issues.

With health care it is the same way. If the only health care I'm familiar with is private or insured health care and all other knowledge of public type care or how health care works in other countries is what I've heard on media.... then the complaints of those in my own country, and the accolades of others extolling the virtues of their system and the highlighting of the virtues in a system made by man.... where the failures or the complaints are seldom presented for my comparison of their realities.... and it may be persuasive that a public system is better. Still, if polled, what is my response but an opinion which is carefully shaped by the sources of my knowledge and experience.... both limited and unscientific?

This health care reform which is being pushed is the most serious effort which threatens or promises change ever advanced to the levels of decision which have forced the public to take a serious look at the reasons behind our prior assumptions and complaints and to look for more than opinions expressed by others who have a different system and have little knowledge or experience with our system to present a balanced objective view. It maybe also that in our failing economic conditions.... those who relied on having the best health care their money and insurance could buy, are discovering that even in our own system.... there are doctors who understand and deliver discount services.... one has to find them; there are drug companies which are supplying free drugs or discounted drugs to the needy who cannot afford them...one has to find which companies and how their programs work; there are public and private grants going into programs supporting expensive research into better medications and improved technologies.... which sets our nation apart and the leader in much innovation in health care; plus the freedom and the right of our people to chose for themselves alopathic or alternative choices or a blend which works best for them.

Our people are watching the development and treatment of this global flu 'crisis' elsewhere... and watching our own country's response. People are begining to see that the complaints they thought they had with private payer is different than the limits faced by those in government programs of health care as represented by the VA response to verterans, those on social security dependant on Medicare and Medicaid, the public health care systems mixed response to the flu vaccine available after making promises and having time to plan distribution. These are beginning to become part of the new perspective on public vs private and factor in to the response to poll responses by the observant public.

Still, polls represent gross divisions or agreements of opinions. It is a poor decision for a person to represent the best interest of the people or make law based upon no more information than a poll.

 

I don't think that the mathematics of polling (statistics) is generally know even among people with technical smarts.

It is possible to design a poll that is not slanted but this is not the purpose of most popular polls.

Both of these assertions can be observed at work in the polls posted on web sites.

 

Very interesting. I'm not sure how to interpret how the data has changed since last July.

Has the quality of health care improved that much in that time?
Were people overly pessimistic about their health care in July 2008?
Are people overly optimistic about their health care today?
What role has the current health care debate had on people's perception of the care they currently receive?

 

People got a fresh dose of perspective.

They realized that this healthcare folks complain about is fantastic compared to the train wreck that our socialist wannabee's in government will make of it.

 

There's a tremendous leap if you realize that opinion polls are just that... at any time. But there's a difference between an uninformed public and an informed public. This poll appears more credible of the public taking interest and becoming more informed. It also exposes a weakness, even in taking this poll...... that if you can identify the demographics of those who are less informed or recipient of inferior care options and limited experience and limit a poll to those by eliminating others then the poll can still be skewed.

As I mentioned earlier..... the only thinga a poll does is identify public opinion.

A poll is not scientific in determining the truth or the false facts behind the opinions. If one wishes to go with the crowd..... the poll indicates where the crowd is going or what their perceptions are. But a poll doesn't establish the error or correctness of their perceptions. Just like a 14th century poll may get overwhelming agreement that the earth is flat.... but a scientific study to discover whether the earth is flat or the earth is round would reveal the popularity of thinking is wrong.

In the case of health care..... people who responded 6 months ago, based upon little more information than that of media, incidental stories of friends and acquaintances, and their own experiences were unstudied regarding the broader scope of issues. The fact that a tremendous change in health care may take place which will not yield to retreat once its implimented, has forced these people, along with many others to rethink their positions and perhaps reassess the bases of their complaints and recognize the power they still possess to choose and control when health care is controlled by the private sector as opposed to total control of government. The former is still maliable to adaptations but the latter is a stone of unchanging and limited choices and plasticity.

The reality, public or private, health care does cost: The preconception that government health care would provide services more cheaply is unproven. But freedom of movement/ shoice is protected in the private sector. But the public arrangement may cause a migration of doctors to leave their practice and even narrow the availability to specialists or options of care because of government incentives, restraints, and other limitations. While the basic and more frequent care may be offered to certain groups such as children and women of chid bearing years.... there may be areas of care limited or denied because specialists aren't available or monies aren't allocated for persons or groups of persons who could benefit from the care. Once government is in control of the purse strings, all but those in elite positions will be limited in accepting what is available or doing without. A change of jobs with a better health care package or an increase in income to private pay expenses wont be an option of choice, possibilities.... hope.

In a recent program on PBS, regarding the Indians plight on the reservations.... I heard a statement in regard to health care on the reservation to the effect "The people are told, if you're going to get sick.... do so before the months of May or June. If you wait 'til then to get sick, the money for health care will run out and you must wait until the budget is resupplied... July or August, before you can get in line to be seen by a doctor." Yes.... this is the pattern of government allocations for services it provides and pays for......... and the experience of those who need to be seen of waiting in lines for screening then appointments and tests and referrals.

 

I essentially agree with this but I think the fresh perspective is not necessarily because of a comparison with the government plan, but a comparison with the type of health care that other americans are currently getting.

My current theory for the change in public opinion is that the health care debate has highlighted some of the more serious problems in the current system experienced by those who cannot afford good health care, and resulted in people who can afford good health care realizing that they don't have it so bad.

I could be wrong but that's my current thought.