5 ms·
The thing to take from it is not that the figure the linked study arrives at is "right", but that the cited 2/3 figure is seriously flawed to the point that it
by threemux 2y ago
The thing to take from it is not that the figure the linked study arrives at is "right", but that the cited 2/3 figure is seriously flawed to the point that it shouldn't be cited.
As it is, the 2/3 statistic is mainly used to score political points and indeed one of the authors of the original study that came up with the 60% number is Elizabeth Warren. Now, you could say she participated in her capacity as an academic, but I personally have a hard time believing she would have put her name on the paper if it had found, say, 4% of bankruptcies came from medical debt.
- tialaramex 2y agoWhy not? 4% is also awful. As a politician you'd probably say "One in every 25" rather than 4% if you wanted to emphasise that it's unacceptable.
- threemux 2y agoYeah I mean you can certainly have the opinion that any amount of medical bankruptcies greater than 0 is unacceptable, but that has nothing to do with my original point that the 2/3 number should not be cited in discussions about bankruptcy.