Job status

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I remember reading an article that Wisconsin's hospitals have lost $300m these past 3 months.

But .. it's interesting to think about health care.  You don't sell $300m of corn, steel, or lawn mowers, the world has less of those things.

Health care .. I'm not so sure about.  Are Wisconsinites $300m less healthy? (COVID notwithstanding..)   Or did Wisconsinites keep $300m in their pockets  to their (or their insurance company's) betterment?

.. And that leads to .. lots of auto insurance companies sent refund checks because people weren't driving much, 90% fewer accidents, way less payout.  Should the health insurance industry do the same?

No because most of these medical claims are going to occur eventually. 

My employer is self-insured.  Our fiscal year ends May 31, and we had a significant decrease in our medical claims in the final quarter of the year.  Our benefits advisor is telling us to expect a significant increase over the next 3-6 months as those delayed visits are rescheduled.  A portion of our furloughed workforce may now decide to have that elective surgury they have been putting off for awhile. 

People aren't going to make up for lost driving.  They will make up for most of their deferred medical care.

[mu03eng]

I remember reading an article that Wisconsin's hospitals have lost $300m these past 3 months.

But .. it's interesting to think about health care.  You don't sell $300m of corn, steel, or lawn mowers, the world has less of those things.

Health care .. I'm not so sure about.  Are Wisconsinites $300m less healthy? (COVID notwithstanding..)   Or did Wisconsinites keep $300m in their pockets  to their (or their insurance company's) betterment?

.. And that leads to .. lots of auto insurance companies sent refund checks because people weren't driving much, 90% fewer accidents, way less payout.  Should the health insurance industry do the same?

Largely yes, Wisconsinites got less healthy over this period(unless they started exercising, got outside, etc). Its not just surgeries, its deferred screenings, having to live with pain/bad outcomes because they aren't going to physical therapy, etc. How many people missed their mammograms or prostate exams that might have caught early stage cancer that might go undetected for another 3 months until everything gets caught up?

[GooooMarquette]

Largely yes, Wisconsinites got less healthy over this period(unless they started exercising, got outside, etc). Its not just surgeries, its deferred screenings, having to live with pain/bad outcomes because they aren't going to physical therapy, etc. How many people missed their mammograms or prostate exams that might have caught early stage cancer that might go undetected for another 3 months until everything gets caught up?

Correct. Add delayed colonoscopies, Pap smears, and even general exams that sometimes detect things like melanomas. And people living with more back pain, neck pain, etc.

And it's going to take WAY more than 3 months to catch up for a 3-month moratorium. Even though these "elective" procedures are now open, most places still aren't operating at full capacity in anticipation of the second wave. Plus, other patients likely already had appointments scheduled for the currently available time slots. So providers are going to have to figure out how to juggle the backlog with people who had existing appointments, all within a less than full-time schedule. It may take until the end of the year to get things back to normal...and that assumes we don't get a large second wave....

[MU82]

Historically unpopular at between 43 and 45%?

Mike, Jimmy Carter was at 30% the June before his November loss to Reagan. “W” spent a lot of time in the 20s. Even President Obama spent 3 pretty long stints at the 40% mark. Didn’t look up Clinton or George the elder but I’d imagine they both spent time in the dumpster and that H.W. was pretty low at this time before his re-election loss.Reagan is the only president in the last 5+ decades who didn’t spend long periods below the Mendoza line.

Lenny:

If you look at the aggregate disapproval ratings on the 538 site, Trump has a 53.4% disapproval rating through 1,219 days of his presidency.

At the exact same stage of their presidencies, here were others' disapproval ratings:

Obama - 46.5
Bush Sr - 48.6
Clinton - 37.8
Bush Jr - 51.5
Reagan - 38.0
Carter - 50.2
Nixon - 33.6
LBJ - 41.4
Ike - 17.1
Truman - 45.5

As you can see, only Dubya and Carter were over 50% disapproval at this stage, and both were still well below Trump's 53.4%.

(Approval polls only go back to Truman, and obviously JFK and Ford didn't get to 1,219 days.)

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

So when I say that Trump is historically unpopular, I'm not just pulling it out of thin air. The data does back up what I'm saying.

Now, Trump did have a slightly higher approval rating at the 1,219-day mark than Bush Sr., Carter and Truman did.

All of the above data underscores what most of us already know: Trump has tens of millions very loyal followers who will back him no matter what he does or says. On the other hand, he also is disliked by a higher percentage of Americans than any other president in the last 70+ years, at least statistically speaking through 40 or so months as president.

I understand what you're saying, too, Lenny. There were many times in which previous presidents had lower approval ratings than Trump's average. That's especially true for Carter and Bush Sr, but even Reagan and Clinton spent a little time under 40%. So I certainly am not saying you are "wrong."

I am trying to compare apples-to-apples as best I can, and I think looking at approval and disapproval ratings at the exact same stage of each presidency does that best. You obviously are free to disagree on methodology.

Trump is the only president in the history of ratings to have never hit 50% approval in an aggregate of polls. Indeed, he had only one day - just 6 days into his presidency - in which he hit 46%. His approval rating has been amazingly range-bound between approximately 40% and 45%, again a sign of the loyalty of his followers but also an indication that he has failed to bring many new supporters into his camp.

At no point during his first 1,219 days as president did Obama have as high a disapproval rating as Trump. There were a couple of days about 2 1/2 years into each man's presidency that Trump did have a slightly higher approval rating than Obama. For example, on Day 981, Trump's approval rating was 42.8% and Obama's was 42.7%.

The aggregator is pretty fun to mess around with, Lenny, gives some pretty good snapshots into various presidents' histories. Most had some very high highs and very low lows.

The site also has a lot of information on head-to-head polling, both nationally and in states, and there is info on governor's races and congressional races, too.

I enjoy having respectful, data-backed discussions like this, Lenny. Have a safe, restful Memorial Day.

[mu_hilltopper]

Interesting thoughts, gents.  Not saying you're incorrect, but probing questions.

While some items are delayed to be rescheduled, like a hip replacement, I get it, that's shifting an event from one quarter to the next.   Maybe at best (worst) you delay your mammogram and so have one less over your lifetime, but that time horizon is measured in decades.

They've also reported that medical visits about stroke is down 40% and heart attacks down 40-60%.   While a chunk of that will end up being delayed care .. another chunk was (always) false positives, chest pain for other more benign reasons.

Anecdotally, over my 50ish years, I've gone to a doc maybe a dozen times for some issue or another .. easily 80% of those times, I've walked away with, roughly, take some asprin and give it a week or two, if it persists, get back to me -- and then I was fine. 

I think your point is taken .. I think though that SOME will be delayed care, and some will simply be skipped -- people had issues that actually went away with time. 

My Holiday Inn Express medical and economics degree says a good half of that medical expense will NOT be shifted into another quarter.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

As you can see, only one-term presidents Dubya

If only. Bush the Lesser was over 50% disapproval, but it was Voodoo Economics Bush that was the one-termer.

[muwarrior69]

Lenny:

If you look at the aggregate disapproval ratings on the 538 site, Trump has a 53.4% disapproval rating through 1,219 days of his presidency.

At the exact same stage of their presidencies, here were others' disapproval ratings:

Obama - 46.5
Bush Sr - 48.6
Clinton - 37.8
Bush Jr - 51.5
Reagan - 38.0
Carter - 50.2
Nixon - 33.6
LBJ - 41.4
Ike - 17.1
Truman - 45.5

As you can see, only one-term presidents Dubya and Carter were over 50% disapproval at this stage, and both were still well below Trump's 53.4%.

(Approval polls only go back to Truman, and obviously JFK and Ford didn't get to 1,219 days.)

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

So when I say that Trump is historically unpopular, I'm not just pulling it out of thin air. The data does back up what I'm saying.

Now, Trump did have a slightly higher approval rating at the 1,219-day mark than Bush Sr., Carter and Truman did.

All of the above data underscores what most of us already know: Trump has tens of millions very loyal followers who will back him no matter what he does or says. On the other hand, he also is disliked by a higher percentage of Americans than any other president in the last 70+ years, at least statistically speaking through 40 or so months as president.

I understand what you're saying, too, Lenny. There were many times in which previous presidents had lower approval ratings than Trump's average. That's especially true for Carter and Bush Sr, but even Reagan and Clinton spent a little time under 40%. So I certainly am not saying you are "wrong."

I am trying to compare apples-to-apples as best I can, and I think looking at approval and disapproval ratings at the exact same stage of each presidency does that best. You obviously are free to disagree on methodology.

Trump is the only president in the history of ratings to have never hit 50% approval in an aggregate of polls. Indeed, he had only one day - just 6 days into his presidency - in which he hit 46%. His approval rating has been amazingly range-bound between approximately 40% and 45%, again a sign of the loyalty of his followers but also an indication that he has failed to bring many new supporters into his camp.

At no point during his first 1,219 days as president did Obama have as high a disapproval rating as Trump. There were a couple of days about 2 1/2 years into each man's presidency that Trump did have a slightly higher approval rating than Obama. For example, on Day 981, Trump's approval rating was 42.8% and Obama's was 42.7%.

The aggregator is pretty fun to mess around with, Lenny, gives some pretty good snapshots into various presidents' histories. Most had some very high highs and very low lows.

The site also has a lot of information on head-to-head polling, both nationally and in states, and there is info on governor's races and congressional races, too.

I enjoy having respectful, data-backed discussions like this, Lenny. Have a safe, restful Memorial Day.

...and what President has gotten 90-96% negative news coverage for his entire term? I'm surprised his approval ratings are as high as they are.

[MU82]

Lenny, Lenny. OMB, didn't you know?

Nads will tell you again, and again and again and again...

[MU82]

If only. Bush the Lesser was over 50% disapproval, but it was Voodoo Economics Bush that was the one-termer.

D'oh ... thanks for the correction. I fixed it.

[wadesworld]

...and what President has gotten 90-96% negative news coverage for his entire term? I'm surprised his approval ratings are as high as they are.

Ahh yes. All that unfair fake news.

More hilarious sarcasm for the man!

[MU82]

...and what President has gotten 90-96% negative news coverage for his entire term? I'm surprised his approval ratings are as high as they are.

If one wants to, it's usually pretty easy to come up with "yeah but" reasons to challenge any facts on any subject ever.

For example, one could say it's incredible -- unheard of, really -- that Trump's aggregate approval rating never hit 48% even though the economy generally has done well during his term.

But I'm simply gonna stick with the data.

[MarquetteDano]

...and what President has gotten 90-96% negative news coverage for his entire term? I'm surprised his approval ratings are as high as they are.

Kind of his own worst enemy.  No president in my lifetime has attacked the press more and said things like "you people".  That combative relationship has not helped his coverage.

[Galway Eagle]

Kind of his own worst enemy.  No president in my lifetime has attacked the press more and said things like "you people".  That combative relationship has not helped his coverage.

Yeah it's literally making fun of someone then crying about why they won't be your friend.

[pbiflyer]

...and what President has gotten 90-96% negative news coverage for his entire term? I'm surprised his approval ratings are as high as they are.

Yeah, they are constantly reporting on what he actually says and tweets. It’s almost like a vast left wing covfefe!

[Elonsmusk]

Kind of his own worst enemy.  No president in my lifetime has attacked the press more and said things like "you people".  That combative relationship has not helped his coverage.

This is true.  He hasn't done himself any favors with the media.  However, when he announced his candidacy he was widely mocked on CNN and other networks.  And Trump's style is to fight fire with fire.  In my view he would be better served to just let some things slide and not be so thin skinned.

Ultimately his candidacy just umasked that the mainstream media lean left.  Fox News of course is reviled because it is the only network that has a national TV platform that leans conservative.  No other TV network is so reviled, which ultimately proves the left leanings and echo chamber of the rest of TV networks whether ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC.  Of course its long been known NY Times and WaPost are left leaning.

Keep in mind the mainstream media assured us of a stock market crash if Trump were elected, and that he was unhinged and mentally unstable and would lead us into war.  They fanned the flames of fear and many bought in.  Reality is, just the opposite happened - our economy thrived and our intervention abroad diminished.  ISIS neutralized.  Syria in check.  North Korea tensions reduced. 

Ultimately he's offensive AF to the politically correct, which is exactly where the division begins - half the country is fed up with the p.c. movement, the other half thinks it needs to continue/expand.  He was correct to identify that China, not Russia, is the ultimate threat to the U.S.

[Uncle Rico]

This is true.  He hasn't done himself any favors with the media.  However, when he announced his candidacy he was widely mocked on CNN and other networks.  And Trump's style is to fight fire with fire.  In my view he would be better served to just let some things slide and not be so thin skinned.

Ultimately his candidacy just umasked that the mainstream media lean left.  Fox News of course is reviled because it is the only network that has a national TV platform that leans conservative.  No other TV network is so reviled, which ultimately proves the left leanings and echo chamber of the rest of TV networks whether ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC.  Of course its long been known NY Times and WaPost are left leaning.

Keep in mind the mainstream media assured us of a stock market crash if Trump were elected, and that he was unhinged and mentally unstable and would lead us into war.  They fanned the flames of fear and many bought in.  Reality is, just the opposite happened - our economy thrived and our intervention abroad diminished.  ISIS neutralized.  Syria in check.  North Korea tensions reduced. 

Ultimately he's offensive AF to the politically correct, which is exactly where the division begins - half the country is fed up with the p.c. movement, the other half thinks it needs to continue/expand.  He was correct to identify that China, not Russia, is the ultimate threat to the U.S.

Ivanka Trump brands, Made in China

[Jockey]

Ultimately he's offensive AF to the politically correct, which is exactly where the division begins - half the country is fed up with the p.c. movement, the other half thinks it needs to continue/expand.  He was correct to identify that China, not Russia, is the ultimate threat to the U.S.

It is not "politically correct" to abhor racists. His entire campaign evolved from his birther racism.

He also did not "identify" that China is the biggest threat. That was stated well before he was on the scene.

Trump has praised China and Xi endlessly. Just a couple months ago, he said, “He’s for China, I’m for the US, but other than that we love each other. Our relationship with China has probably never been better. We went through a very rough patch, but it has never, ever been better.”

[4everwarriors]

If I didn't care so much about our country's future and those I love, I'd enjoy being a fly on the wall and watch you struggle, along with like-minded individuals under the "leadership" of Senile Joe and his blue congress. Heaven help us all, hey?

[pbiflyer]

If I didn't care so much about our country's future and those I love, I'd enjoy being a fly on the wall and watch you struggle, along with like-minded individuals under the "leadership" of Senile Joe and his blue congress. Heaven help us all, hey?

Covfefe!

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

If I didn't care so much about our country's future and those I love, I'd enjoy being a fly on the wall and watch you struggle, along with like-minded individuals under the "leadership" of Senile Joe and his blue congress. Heaven help us all, hey?

The country as a whole has been better under Clinton and Obama than it has under Bush or Trump. So I would be good with that.

[Jockey]

If I didn't care so much about our country's future and those I love, I'd enjoy being a fly on the wall and watch you struggle, along with like-minded individuals under the "leadership" of Senile Joe and his blue congress. Heaven help us all, hey?

That is funny. 100,000 dead, depression era economy and you are “waiting” for the country to struggle.

Thanks for making my day.

[4everwarriors]

Ewe ain't seen nothin' yet, partner.

[GooooMarquette]

The country as a whole has been better under Clinton and Obama than it has under Bush or Trump. So I would be good with that.

Can’t argue with that.

[withoutbias]

“Sleepy Joe” might be old and past his mental peak, but Trump isn’t? I mean seriously, how does this guy get people to actually believe this stuff? The only difference in mental capacity between the two is one will put people in place who deserve to be there based on experience and ability to do a job and he will get out of their way and let them do it, while the other will put his rich white male friends in place and then overrule them and fire them when they try to do what is right vs. what Trump wants. And the second is a pathological liar.

[4everwarriors]

So nice ta have an open mind, aina?🤣