Doctors Support Universal Healthcare

Fair enough. I will keep that in mind if you ever post the results of surveys or polls to support your argument and I will avoid posting poll and survey results as evidence to counter your arguments. In fact, most statistics have little value in your worldview.

For many other people. The results of surveys and polls are good approximations of a larger body of data. In year 12 math or first year statistics, you are introduced to a statistical concept called a confidence interval which is a calculation of how well a statistical analysis like a poll, survey, research paper, etc is able to estimate the results expected for a larger population. They will never be exactly the same as the larger population but a well conducted study states their 95% confidence intervals which says that they are 95% confident that the actual number lies within a certain range. For example, if a study says 70% support Bush and 30% do not and their 95% confidence interval is 3%, then they are 95% confident that the true number for support of Bush is between 67-73% and the true number for opposition is 27-33%. Better confidence intervals are achieved with large enough sample sizes relative to the population they are trying to estimate.

The reality is that compulsary census' cost way too much and require too many resources to run and only occur every 5-10 years or so because of costs. Due to limitations of time, they are limited in the scope of questions they can ask. By the time the data is collected and analyzed, it is often too late because things have changed again. The value of a census is to get a large snapshot at a certain point in time.

Think of compulsary census' as high resolution film pictures. While polls, surveys and research studies are like low resolution digital videos.

 

Hmmm...

For some reason, I sense that you fail to understand the differences between a properly conducted "poll" and a "survey".

I suggest you study the matter in order not to tax your memories to excess.:thumbs:

 

Very funny!!!!!


Sadly, however, .....

I have trouble understanding how you can 'believe something' you take as it is without question or testing.

Many who say they believe a certain way do so based upon anothers opinion or influence or persuasion ..... but have never challenged themselves to really prove it to themselves. BUT, because their 'mind is made up' they block the information which might prove otherwise.

It is similar to the spiritual condition where hearts are hardened. We are told to seek the light. The scriptures tell us that people love darkness rather than light because the love of the truth is not in them.

 

The colleges in America spend $5 billion on intercollegiate athletics and take in $4 billion for a loss of $1 billion.

 

Some of my friends are doctors and tell me that a huge amount of their money goes to malpractice nsurance. Many doctors are paid 75 and 80 percent of what medicare pays by the insurance companies. So they like medicare better. It is likely that government healthcare may bring them in a betetr income.

When I was in Europe I found that the healthcare I received was better than what I have received in the U.S. with much less cost.

 

Let me get this straight, are you are proposing that polls are reputable because they are properly conducted but surveys are useless because they are not properly conducted?

If that is your view, that is an interesting perspective given that polls are a type of survey.

I believe there are properly conducted polls and properly conducted surveys. There are also improperly conducted polls and improperly conducted surveys. Randomisation and a good sample size leading to small confidence intervals are two ways to properly conduct a poll or survey.

My previous post was in response to the argument presented by windcatcher and agreed to by yourself that surveys and polls are inaccurate because they do not represent the views of those who did not participate.

 

Merriam-Webster Dictionary - Survey [2,noun]

 

>The colleges in America spend $5 billion on intercollegiate athletics and take in $4 billion for a loss of $1 billion.

Because of Title 18 (? whatever it is) requiring equal access for females?

 

Should be obvious from this list and others that most polls are designed to get a specific result by the way the questions are asked.

 

Don't go off the deep end.

But study up on it. Get back to me when you understand the differences.

 

That did not occur until way after that. I think it has more to do with image and ESPN, etc.

A good article is at http://www.uni.edu/unitedfaculty/posted_documents/Intercollegiate Athletics.pdf

 

Your definition of the words poll and survey do not appear to be consistent with the way they are used in common english found in dictionaries or statistics texts.

I've been asking for what you think the problem with this data since the 5th post on this thread. If you have a valid concern I could agree with you. If you have an invalid one like the one addressed from windcatcher that you agreed with, I could help address some incorrect assumptions.

Or you can choose to avoid having to defend your position.

 

*double post *

 

carpro, the following threads you created referenced articles with data from polls that are also called surveys. I assume they are useless to you as well because they are surveys.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=43398&highlight=poll
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=41348&highlight=poll

If your argument is that surveys that are not polls are useless, then I would like to know:
a) how do you define a survey that is not a poll?
b) what is wrong with them?

In the survey quoted in this thread, the reason I called it a poll earlier was because it is a survey that is a poll.

 

Let me clarify my position:
Wiki will speak for me:

In other words.... it is easy to make a poll. In our economy of time and desire to know what other people think.... it is easy to have others believe a poll. However a person who accepts every poll he/she reads as a true representation without questions is either ignorant or too willing to stick their head in sand except when they see their viewpoint represented. There are some polls considered more reliable than others due to the care and research in developing and delivering the product. But even they are subject to error.

 

I agree that there are good polls and bad polls and the way that questions are asked in them is an important factor.

What is it about this particular poll that leads you to believe that it is a bad poll?

Are people who do not respond to the poll more likely to vote a certain way?
Is the person who conducted the poll disreputable?
Do the questions appear to be leading to a specific response?
Did they have an inadequate sample size?
Was the sample non-random and selected to encourage a specific response?

These are the types of criticisms of a poll that are valid criticisms if you can show they were the case in this poll.

"The results do not agree with my view" is not a valid criticism of the methodology of a poll.

 

windcatcher, the following line from the Nonresponse bias section of the Wiki article you posted addresses your concern about non-responders.

You appear to believe that non-responders to this poll would have voted differently. What characteristic of non-responders to this poll is different from the responders of this poll?

This is why I asked my original question in post #5.