Trump and Republicans have no qualms about using false numbers about everything including the economy and the effects of tariffs to justify their action. But sometimes those numbers are so obviously false that one wonders how they could say them with a straight face.
Take for example, Trump claiming that he has reduced prices. He throws around random large numbers for the size of the reductions , saying that they are 500%, 1000%, 5000%, and so on, adding that “No one has seen numbers like that”. There is a good reason that no one has seen numbers like that since anyone who is even barely numerate would know that you cannot reduce the price of anything by more than 100% since a reduction of 100% would make it free.
You would expect that Mehmet Oz, who used to be a heart surgeon (and reputedly a good one) before he went on to become a TV personality peddling all manner of dubious health advice, would know better. But this newly minted Trump fanboy tried to explain away Trump’s absurd numbers using absurd arguments.
NBC’s Kristen Welker pointed out in an interview Wednesday night that Trump has repeatedly mentioned cutting drug prices by more than 100 percent, even throwing out mathematically impossible figures such as “1,200; 1,300; 1,400; 1,500 percent.” Welker asked Oz if making cuts of 100 percent or higher would essentially make drugs free.
“Is that a realistic goal from the president?” she asked. The former TV host failed to clear things up.
“The president does the calculation by saying, ‘OK, if a drug was $100 and you reduce it to $50, it’s 100 percent cheaper because you’re taking $50 off and left with only $50, so the amount you took off the price is equal to the amount that’s left. They’re equal so it’s 100 percent,” Oz replied.
Walker reminded Oz that Trump threw out 1,500 percent as one figure, and Oz doubled down in his reply.
“Well, if you take a drug that is $200 or $240, like we did last week, and reduce it to $10, those are the numbers you’re talking about. That stated, the bigger question we should be asking ourselves is why didn’t we do this earlier?” Oz said.
But even beyond that ridiculous argument, Oz also fails the basic test of recognizing absurd numbers, as can be seen during a press conference touting the reductions in prices of weight loss drugs.
Oz initially stated that those agreements could help Americans lose a collective 125 million pounds by the 2026 midterms. He later adjusted that number – by a staggering amount.
“We thought it was 125 million pounds,” Oz said. “Mr. President, our estimate, based on the company numbers as well, is that Americans will lose 135 billion pounds by the midterms.”
The Census Bureau’s latest estimate placed the current U.S. population at 342 million. Going off that number, every American would need to lose about 394 pounds over the next year to hit Oz’s figure.
And if the the group was limited to the estimated 146.9 million people on Medicare and Medicaid, each individual would need to lose an average of 900 pounds.
The nationwide weight-loss goal Oz mentioned Thursday would be significantly more realistic if he intended to say 135 million, rather than billion. Americans on Medicare and Medicaid would only need to lose nine-tenths of a pound each for a collective loss of 135 million pounds.
Ah, but a loss of nine-tenths of a pound over a year is hardly something to crow about. So Oz went with the higher figure even though anyone with a basic knowledge of arithmetic would immediately know it was rubbish.
Trump has been spewing out these bogus numbers about the reductions in prices several times. A reduction in drug prices of even 25% would be impressive and 50% would be staggeringly good. I am certain that someone in his circle would have told him that his numbers make no sense but he does not care. He, like Oz, thinks big numbers are more impressive, even if they are absurd.
They clearly have contempt for the intelligence of the public.
“OK, if a drug was $100 and you reduce it to $50, it’s 100 percent cheaper because you’re taking $50 off and left with only $50, so the amount you took off the price is equal to the amount that’s left.”
In a sense percentages are weird, If you reduce $100 to $50 you have reduced it by 50%, but afterwards you can say the price was 100% more expensive than it was now.
What Trump, Oz and their minions are doing is playing with our sense of time. By acting like they have already implemented the reduction, they can say “before our actions, prices were x% higher!” where x% sounds a lot more favourable to them than the “real” x% of the reduction.
They either don’t understand percentages, or they understand them well enough to play games with them, in order to manipulate whomever is reading.
In the first case, Trump and his cronies are idiots.
In the second case, Trump and his cronies are manipulative bastards.
Neither looks well for them.
robert79 @1: Both cases are true.
A surprising number of people don’t know what a (short) billion is to begin with; the world is not ready for my intended revival of the long count system. Also, the the lasting lesson taught by Ben “Famous Brain Surgeon” Carson was: even brain surgeons can be fucking morons.
Americans could see a reduction of 90% on certain medications and would still be overpaying, compared to the global market.
For humor purposes only:
Drinking a couple of cups of coffee in the morning can increase weight by a half pound which is lost again by respiration and urination. Over a day, a few pounds, and over a year it adds up to a thousand pounds. So, “Ozcillational® Weight Control Program© coming to a store near you!”, is a future ad waiting for the right quantum superposition collapse to get us into that world.
In Australia, consumers typically don’t see the cost price of prescription drugs: currently, most are price capped at about USD20/prescription (and about USD5 for health concession card holders, e.g. old age pension beneficiaries). The scheme has been in place since 1948. All legal residents (including non-citizens) are eligible. It costs the Australian government about USD13 billion/year to fund (for a population of about 28 million).
This does not surprise me in the least. For many years I have been saying that many (perhaps a majority) of USAians are innumerate, that is, mathematically illiterate. They do not have the computational skills expected of a grade schooler. Surprisingly, this is not a source of shame. While no one would brag that they are illiterate, people openly state that they are “terrible at math”. They would never say “I have the reading comprehension of an eight year old”, but have no problem stating that they can’t figure out a 15% tip for a $65 dinner bill. Indeed, they are dismissive of it, as in the flippant response “You do the math”.
I spent most of my life surrounded by people (students and colleagues) in science and engineering so I was largely insulated from this. Then I started noticing that people couldn’t perform simple tasks like making change (yes, I am one of those crazy people who will give a cashier a twenty, a quarter and a dime when the bill is $18.35, thinking I am making things easier for them, and then watch as they hand me back the quarter, dime, another 65 cents and a single dollar bill in change). Then, I started teaching a science elective for non-science majors. I had students who were completely lost when handed a square steel plate and a ruler in lab, and told to find the area.
No American politician will ever pay a price for saying something that is mathematically impossible. Indeed, they won’t pay a price for stating things that are implausible or for which there is no supporting evidence (to wit: trickle-down economics and “tax cuts for the rich will increase revenues”). All they have to do is say it with conviction and repeat it often. Their audience does not have the skills required to dissect what they say.
So when people tell me that the USA is the world leader in science and technology, and that we will always be, I just laugh sardonically.
jimf: “So when people tell me that the USA is the world leader in science and technology, and that we will always be, I just laugh sardonically.”
Many of the leading scientists are imported. Like the ones who built the a-bomb.
Trump knows his audience. They are so stupid that they voted him.
@6 jimf: Part of it is that the press lets Trump get away with it. He has set the expectations so low, punished those that point out his errors so hard and makes so many that even obvious mistakes and lies get no response from the press. Biden was harangued for various verbal slip ups, Trump gets away with huge errors on a regular basis.
I used to annoy cashiers that way. I needed quarters to pay for parking all the time. So in that situation I would give the cashier $20.10 and even experienced ones didn’t know what to make of it. Now cashiers handle so little actual cash that I don’t really expect they know how to make change.
Last century, there was a supermarket I used to go to where I would add up the prices of the goods I was buying as I walked around the store; then I would hand over the exact amount at the till, not a penny more or less.
The look the checkout assistants invariably gave me suggested they could not work out how I had performed this feat.
i agree with jimf.
i ran into innumeracy in the 90’s while being a TA in grad school. the innumeracy rate has not improved over the last 30 years or so.
now, by my reckoning, 5 out of 4 people are innumerate.
re jimf @6: I still often use cash when purchasing food, and I have run into similar situations of clueless cashiers. The fact is that they can’t do simple math. If it wasn’t for the machine where they place the order having a built-in calculator to tell them what change to make, they would be unable to do the math in their heads.
Agree with everyone about the innumeracy. Not long ago I had a store coupon for 50% off a single item. I bought a $22 bag of dog food. The cash register didn’t know how to read the store coupon, the clerk didn’t know how to figure out 50% of $22 and had to call a manager.