# Are debates inadequate to change minds? (Bernie/Cruz Debate) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 9, 2017, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362 "2017-02-09T00:44:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/21 "2017-02-09T18:53:08Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > But that doesn’t mean that them not being able to expand is desirable in and of itself. That just means that it’s a price worth paying in order to have a mandate that “big” businesses provide health care. That’s what I am saying - Bernie believes that this is a price worth paying - that, overall, it is better that this hair salon owner not be able to expand and thus employ more people. Because if she did hire them, they would have jobs, but they wouldn’t have health care. No jobs and no health care is better than jobs and no health care. Which is why, as I said, I was surprised that Sanders didn’t talk about universal taxpayer-funded health care. That way, at least he can change the topic from “I can’t expand because I can’t afford to buy health care” to “I can’t expand because I can’t afford to pay the taxes”. And then he can go back to talking about how we could afford another $10T in debt if we just didn’t buy so many kinds of deodorant. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/22 "2017-02-09T18:58:32Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > That’s what I am saying - Bernie believes that this is a price worth paying - that, overall, it is better that this hair salon owner not be able to expand and thus employ more people. Because if she did hire them, they would have jobs, but they wouldn’t have health care. No jobs and no health care is better than jobs and no health care. Again, the last sentence doesn’t follow. He might think it’s better for this particular hair salon owner to hire people without healthcare than to not hire them at all, but the only way to have that (or comparable, in some situation) would be to not have any employer mandate at all. So he’s not weighing this employer hiring people without healthcare versus this employer not hiring people at all. He’s weighing thousands of other employers not offering healthcare coverage for their employees versus this employer (and others in her situation) not hiring people at all. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/23 "2017-02-09T19:21:58Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > Society is not making this decision, the government is. The question is whether the government is making a rational decision. In the case of the hair salon owner, she wants to expand and hire more people. The government is telling her that she can not because she can not afford to offer them health insurance coverage. Thus the government is making the judgement that the prospective employees are better off with no job than with a job with no health insurance attached. > I can think of alternatives to both the current system and national health insurance. I would like to start a business. I believe that it won’t be profitable enough for me unless I pay my employees $7 an hour. The government requires that employees be paid more. Thus the government is making the judgement that the prospective employees are better off with no job than with a job paying less than the minimum wage. Correct? ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/24 "2017-02-09T19:26:48Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > I would like to start a business. I believe that it won’t be profitable enough for me unless I pay my employees $7 an hour. The government requires that employees be paid more. Thus the government is making the judgement that the prospective employees are better off with no job than with a job paying less than the minimum wage. > > Correct? Incorrect. You are not the only employer that exists. You are assuming that your potential employees can’t possibly find another job and without your company opening they will in fact have no job. Obviously this is a false premise. You have the choice of opening your business in another country without a minimum wage, and your hypothetical future employees have the choice to seek employment anywhere they wish. ---
**Author:** ![squidfood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a87d85/32.png) [@squidfood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/squidfood)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/25 "2017-02-09T19:31:02Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Which is why, as I said, I was surprised that Sanders didn’t talk about universal taxpayer-funded health care. That way, at least he can change the topic from “I can’t expand because I can’t afford to buy health care” to “I can’t expand because I can’t afford to pay the taxes”. The difference is that the tax would be (presumably) incremental from employee #1, so there’s no high-barrier cliff at 50. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/26 "2017-02-09T19:40:05Z")
A: If you want to drive a car you need a license. B: Why are you stopping me from driving a car!? A: I’m not, just get a license. You absolutely can drive a car if you have a license. B: That’s the same thing as banning me from driving. This might as well be Saudi Arabia! Yeah, makes a lot of sense… ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/27 "2017-02-09T19:44:23Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > Incorrect. You are not the only employer that exists Neither was the employer in the example puddleglum was responding to. My question is for puddleglum and those that agree with him. ---
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/28 "2017-02-09T19:53:40Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > Neither was the employer in the example puddleglum was responding to. My question is for puddleglum and those that agree with him. Ok gotcha. I misunderstood who your example was for. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/29 "2017-02-09T20:43:27Z")
> [@Salvor](#): > > This made me lose a little faith in debates though, it seems like very few minds were changed, and the dogma still stands un…pierced. I think there’s a major flaw in American political debates : they aren’t really debates in the sense that the candidates don’t directly adress each other (from what I’ve seen at least). They speak in turn, prompted by the anchors, instead of actually arguing directly. ---
**Author:** ![Salvor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Salvor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Salvor)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/30 "2017-02-09T20:44:19Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > … > It’s not the arbitrariness of the line. I was a little surprised that Sanders didn’t respond that he would, if elected, implement taxpayer-funded health care for all and therefore the hair salon owner would be paying for her employees’ health care no matter whether she expanded or not. > > Of course, the counter argument would be “I can’t afford to pay for health care for my current employees - you want to raise my taxes so I have to. How am I going to afford that?” But that is a more general objection to Sanders’ spending plans, which suffered IIRC somewhere around $10T in shortfall and cost six million jobs. > > Maybe Sanders would stick to his principles then too, and say “maybe unemployment would go up and the national debt doubled again, but it’s better that you are unemployed and your children crippled with debt - at least you have health care”. > > Regards, > Shodan He mentioned it elsewhere, but I do think he missed an opportunity there at that specific time to highlight some of the problems with obamacare and employer based insurance generally. There should have been two answers. In our current imperfect system we should have some line of cutoff where we require insurance in our employer based insurance market. But in a better system I and (YOU hairdresser business owner) ought to want to work towards is moving towards a system of healthcare that is COMPLETELY decoupled from employment. This would be better for all parties. Then there would be no threshold of employees where they had to be covered because coverage would not be tied to employment at all. Hire as many employees as your business desires. That was the time to try and convince her and others of the awfulness of an employer based insurance market. Your talk about being better to be unemployed without health insurance than employed without health insurance is meaningless in Sanders and most liberals desired system. Even if taxes increase to cover the costs, those are costs ALL people and businesses would have to pay. So if her hair business taxes went up, so would all her competitors. That is called a uniform playing field, if costs needed to be raised to stay afloat, it would happen across the board and would not negatively effect any particular business unless the cost increases were SO high that it meaninfully affected sales of … hair cutting/styling. Also, you keep bringing up how a UHC model will make everything vastly more expensive. Why do you assume it will be more costly than what we are paying now? Last I checked, we were spending around 17% of US GDP on healthcare. The latest total expense for 2016 I read was it totaling around 3.35 trillion dollars per year. About 10k per person. Why do you assume that if we went to a UHC system, that could not be lowered? Single payer, single buyer to bargain down costs of drugs and services, elimination of the rats nests of medical billion and bouncing back and force for payment approvals with private insurance. Gone. I want us to increase the money spent on medical residencies to increase doctor supply and better shift doctors to needed areas, and ramp up immigration of skilled immigration in this field or to people looking to go into medicine to tamp down on some of the professional wages. And as a bonus, we can gut the debts doctors incur in medical school to take away some of the burden and need to head straight into ultra high paying fields vs say, reasonably high paying areas of medicine with more need. Conservatives are some of the most negative and nihilistic creatures I’ve ever encountered. They are like malthusians in a way, if we go the UHC route, everything about the current system and costs is assumed to stay the same, it’s such a bizarre reaction. ---
**Author:** ![Salvor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Salvor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Salvor)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/31 "2017-02-09T20:45:25Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > I think there’s a major flaw in American political debates : they aren’t really debates in the sense that the candidates don’t directly adress each other (from what I’ve seen at least). They speak in turn, prompted by the anchors, instead of actually arguing directly. Which begs the question… for an independent thread. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/32 "2017-02-09T21:54:55Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > That’s what I am saying - Bernie believes that this is a price worth paying - that, overall, it is better that this hair salon owner not be able to expand and thus employ more people. Because if she did hire them, they would have jobs, but they wouldn’t have health care. No jobs and no health care is better than jobs and no health care. Just because that owner can’t hack it—can’t adapt to changing circumstances—doesn’t mean some people won’t have jobs. That salon owner is not the only person in that city, state, or country employing people. If she can’t handle expanding her business under a “over 50 employees pay for health-care” law there will be someone else who can “get 'er done”. The jobs will be available somewhere, just not with her. That’s what the flawless Invisible Hand teaches us, isn’t it? Ruthless competition and Survival of the Fittest? Conservatives love that shit, right? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2017, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/33 "2017-02-09T23:00:51Z")
People following a debate are typically like sports fans watching a game. Falcons fans aren’t going to change their minds midway and root for the Patriots or vice versa; their minds were usually made up in advance as to which team they supported. In the Bernie vs. Cruz debate, the followers weren’t trying to learn or be persuaded, they were rooting for Team Bernie or Team Cruz. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/34 "2017-02-10T14:23:57Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Sanders said “sorry, you shouldn’t be allowed to expand”. Because it is apparently better to have no job and no health care than a job and no health care. > > Regards, > Shodan cite? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/35 "2017-02-10T14:28:00Z")
> [@RitterSport](#): > > So…back to the OP, some debates can definitely change some people’s minds. Debates here on this forum have changed my mind on various gun issues, for example. I’m pretty sure than a few posters have had their minds changed on gay marriage because of debates here. > > Presidential debates definitely move polls, at least in the short term, so there was a temporary change of minds at least. I’ve had my mind changed at least a bit on childhood transgender issues. ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/36 "2017-02-10T14:36:18Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > cite? Did you not read past the second post? Shodan already posted his interpretation of what Sanders said. What more are you looking for? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/37 "2017-02-10T14:36:31Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > People following a debate are typically like sports fans watching a game. Falcons fans aren’t going to change their minds midway and root for the Patriots or vice versa; their minds were usually made up in advance as to which team they supported. > > In the Bernie vs. Cruz debate, the followers weren’t trying to learn or be persuaded, they were rooting for Team Bernie or Team Cruz. Debates isn’t going to change minds on issues that are already well fleshed out. but it can change minds on issues where your position is based on insufficient information. For example, someone mentioned the gun issue. Several people on this board have changed their mind on the advisability of banning guns based on cosmetic features. They started out supporting an Assault Weapons Ban because the term “assault weapon” is awfully similar to “assault rifle” (I suspect that the similarity in terms was intentional), and they opposed “military style weapons” because they didn’t realize that “style” meant aesthetic style rather than functionality. So in the end you aren’t going to change the minds of people who are already well informed on the issue but you might change the minds of people who are underinformed. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/38 "2017-02-10T15:03:45Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Again, the last sentence doesn’t follow. > > He might think it’s better for this particular hair salon owner to hire people without healthcare than to not hire them at all, but the only way to have that (or comparable, in some situation) would be to not have any employer mandate at all. > > So he’s not weighing this employer hiring people without healthcare versus this employer not hiring people at all. He’s weighing thousands of other employers not offering healthcare coverage for their employees versus this employer (and others in her situation) not hiring people at all. That’s why I said “overall”. Sanders is weighing thousands of employers, including this one. And concluding that the employer mandate is appropriate. Overall, it is better to prevent employers from hiring if they cannot provide healthcare. Overall, no jobs and no health care is better than jobs with no health care. > [@I Love Me](#): > > Just because that owner can’t hack it—can’t adapt to changing circumstances—doesn’t mean some people won’t have jobs. It means that fewer people will have jobs. > [@](#): > > If she can’t handle expanding her business under a “over 50 employees pay for health-care” law there will be someone else who can “get 'er done”. The jobs will be available somewhere, just not with her. That’s what the flawless Invisible Hand teaches us, isn’t it? Ruthless competition and Survival of the Fittest? Conservatives love that shit, right? No, capitalism does not teach that the market will provide jobs no matter what. Just the opposite - if the cost of hiring someone exceeds the expected benefit of hiring them, they don’t get hired. Just as the hair salon owner described. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/39 "2017-02-10T15:25:44Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > That’s why I said “overall”. Sanders is weighing thousands of employers, including this one. And concluding that the employer mandate is appropriate. Overall, it is better to prevent employers from hiring if they cannot provide healthcare. Overall, no jobs and no health care is better than jobs with no health care. Again, the last sentence doesn’t follow. I’ll try one last time with some (purely illustrative) numbers. Suppose Sander is saying the following: 100,000,000 jobs, of which **9** 0,000,000 offer healthcare are better than 100,00 **1** ,000 jobs of which **7** 0,000,000 offer healthcare. Leaving aside whether the numbers are accurate or whether the trade-off is worthwhile or anything else about the ACA, a person who accepted some version of the above equation could logically say that the hair salon owner shouldn’t be able to expand without offering healthcare without believing that “_no jobs and no health care is better than jobs with no health care_”. Rather, that healthcare for 20,000,000 people outweighs jobs for 1,000 (or whatever the numbers are). Note that I don’t know what Sanders actually thinks about things, and he may have some other approach to the issue. But your assertion doesn’t follow, due to the above. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362/40 "2017-02-10T16:12:01Z")
> [@x-ray\_vision](#): > > I would like to start a business. I believe that it won’t be profitable enough for me unless I pay my employees $7 an hour. The government requires that employees be paid more. Thus the government is making the judgement that the prospective employees are better off with no job than with a job paying less than the minimum wage. > > Correct? Actually, that is correct. If the government says the minimum wage is x, that’s a policy preference. It’s saying it’s better that somebody be unemployed than have a job making less than x. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-debates-inadequate-to-change-minds-bernie-cruz-debate/779362.md?page=3)