The Plastic Baby Effect

 In designing computer software avatar , there is an effect that I have coined -that describes the repulsion users commonly feel when they are confrontly with something that seems real, but then are suddenly to realize it is not.


 This is like seeing a cute little baby - and it's not just a random example - that invokes feelings of pride, and connection. Its like the feeling you got when the Bush Administration was sent packing , in November of 2008.

And then the slow, sinking feeling as you get closer to the baby - that its skin has a dull plastic sheen. 

The plastic baby effect can happen with anything - but it has to be something you would otherwise connect with - and there is a characteristic and trademark revulsion that can be catastrophic. 


Take a look at this link


If you notice , there is a huge backlash against popular democratic support right around March 20, 2010 ... what happened?

March 22, 2010 - the healthcare reform bill passed, and within its compromise package  - my analysis shows the plastic baby effect.  The basically apolitical american electorate thought - that the whole battle about reform, was basically about getting a national health service.  And they cared deeply about it. 72% of Americans wanted it, even as far back as 2004 - support was constant. And always blocked by lobbyism.

So when they found out that the healthcare reform bill that was passed - was one in which they were required to buy insurance from private companies. You can imagine the rest.

Take a look at the poll above and you will see it most clearly demonstrated.

How does one commutate this effect? It can be done away with, in this election - if there are those who are willing to speak up and embrace true reform.

We, as a country - have gotten alot done in the 18 months since the Bush Republicans were driven out of office. Now, the Bush Republicans are knocking at the door to get back in. Do we let them?

We don't have to debate about healthcare reform and its multiple benefits - we have to acknowledge that alot of time, energy and effort were spent to get the real bill passed - and instead, the democrats, and not the republicans - failed to do it.

When I look at the graph at the link above, I see this effect clearly.   But what does it really mean? How do we go forward? The first step is to acknowledge the situation - and then go forward.  There is a vaccuum of discussion about healthcare, but it is the greatest accomplishment of Obama's administration.





Tags: (all tags)



good analysis

The basically apolitical american electorate thought - that the whole battle about reform, was basically about getting a national health service.  And they cared deeply about it. 72% of Americans wanted it, even as far back as 2004 - support was constant. And always blocked by lobbyism.

You hit the nail right on the head. Most polls showed overwhelming support for a public option, in fact even though the mandate was universally unpopular, in certain polls most respondents warmed up to it if they were given an option like a public option or medicare. The backlash against the healthcare reform is as much a backlash against lobbyists, especially on the left. To deride their concerns as hand-wringing is just wrong. Yes, the health care bill was an accomplishment for Obama (not his greatest, I still think Fin-reg was), but it is as much an accomplishment for the House progressive caucus, without whose unbending stand against a awful Senate fill we probably would not even be celebrating all the good stuff in it.

In the end it all boils down to a lack of leadership and terrible messaging. I just can't stress this enough. Certain people should have left their jobs for mystery illnesses long long ago.


by tarheel74 2010-09-24 01:02PM | 0 recs
If it was a mystery illness

Do you think an HMO doctor would allow it to be covered?


This battle means alot to me. The insurance companies are still ripping us off.

by Trey Rentz 2010-09-24 02:20PM | 0 recs
RE: If it was a mystery illness

Unfortunately nothing in the bill can stop that. The only leverage the government has to kick them off the exchange, and those do not start before 2014. And as I said once before, the worst kept secret among insurance companies is that they all offer the same types of insurance and more or less the same rates, and when one of them raise their premiums, the others follow suit. Call it price fixing. So if all insurance companies do the same thing in unison, how many of them will be kicked off the exchanges? Just this week 4 large insurers decided to drop their child only policies across several states. Four of them together on the same day, coincidence?

by tarheel74 2010-09-24 03:44PM | 0 recs
Lets put the money into the equation

When you have taxes that have, basically since 1970 - risen about 20 percent over what it was we were paying then - thanks to progressive taxation - you have an enormous federal budget each year that is dedicated to alot of different things - and not alot of them benefit us.


So, putting the speed of money into this equation, you have a justification on the outset that if we go down the road to National Health, we'll end up with our taxes raised.  But in fact, they've already been raised and alot of the money is just getting wasted.

I want to be able to do Alan Grayson's bill - which said , we can buy in, cash, to medicare. Then, regardless of the size of the large insurance company oligopoly - I will have a fair alternative out there in price structure, and benefits.  Alot of doctors already accept it - the only thing that's going on with changing the law is to simply remove a provision that disallows people of a certain age , and to scale up the infrastructure already in place based on new and incoming receipts.

And then it's highly conceivable we could have a tax situation where we are taxed less, and the economy is alot stronger.  The other companies who are raising our rates like this are practicing taxation without representation.

Who wouldn't want to throw the democrats out? The big insurance companies are already raising their rates - and Americans see this as fixed expenses they can't afford to do without. They're tired of getting screwed.


If you have any time at all, view this clip. It's Elizabeth Warren discussing the financial state of the middle class.

At 18, 21:00  and 31:00 she makes explicit reference to the healthcare problem and how it affects the state of the middle class.

We have to make a decision as to whether or not we want a government that actually responds to us or just listens to guys like those insurance companies you were talking about.


by Trey Rentz 2010-09-24 04:50PM | 0 recs
RE: Lets put the money into the equation

See one of the problems within the Democratic party is that we cannot have a rational dialogue like you and I are having. We have the blind Obama loyalists, who take any criticism as a personal affront to the president, and then you have folks like this new kid who is a front-pager and some of the other "impeach Obama" people.

There are real problems in this country. Believe it or not, the only party with ideas is the Democratic party. We just don't have the leadership, and the leaders we have don't have the political will. That is what's disheartening to a lot of us, like me. We are activists, but both for my job and for my family I have to tangle with these corporations. I see them growing stronger, while my position in society, be it income, importance, you the dream, stagnating. This is what everyone in the country faces. This is why they are restless and want more decisive action, not half-measures, but actions with courage of conviction. If Obama passed a great healthcare bill, broke up the big banks, ended the iraq war and did it all with political courage and in the process lost his reelection, I would have said he is the greatest one term president, hell even the greatest president ever. But these politically expedient half-measures are very disheartening. One reason I think he did not publicly champion the health care bill, like he did for the stimulus or financial regulation, is because he knows deep down that it was a cop-out.

by tarheel74 2010-09-24 06:59PM | 0 recs
RE: Lets put the money into the equation

My vote, Tarheel is that we go and talk to Howard Dean and get him to join up. Rahm Emmanuel was the guy, I think - who bad mouthed Dean to Obama and methinks Rahm will make a deal to keep his bid for mayor of Chicago alive - Rahm wants to leave.

What do you think would happen if Dean got into the game here? And oh. By the way. In APRIL of 2010, Dean was on the Airwaves battling for and winning the House Version of the bill which contained a National Health Service.


In MARCH of 2010, the Senate bill without it ended up making it into law and Dean was on record opposing it - saying, this is real reform and we need to make it right because it will set the tone for reform to come.


March 2010 when the crash of the party happened, after the party leadership brushed off statements like Dean's and ended up paying the price with the Scott Brown Debacle.


What do you think? Can Howard Dean get into this thing, and save it?



by Trey Rentz 2010-09-24 07:20PM | 0 recs
RE: Lets put the money into the equation

I would love to see him do it. If anyone knows Dean well here then it's Jerome. Only he can say what he is up to. I hope Dean makes a comeback and I am all for it.

by tarheel74 2010-09-24 07:25PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads