Pro-choice distortion

[carpedm9587]

Rogue posted a link to an article that explains where the 3% figure comes from and why it's misleading. Did you skip that?

No. I disagreed that it was "misleading."

PP says that it's a percentage of the services they provide, not a percentage of their income. Go read the article. It explains that on a per-patient basis, it's most likely a lot higher than 3%.

That is not "misleading." It is exactly what they say in all of their documentation, and is clearly spelled out. As I noted, a percentage can be for services, or it can be for revenue. 3.4% breaks it out as services. As shown in my previous posts, the revenue is most likely around 14.4% with a range of 8.9-19.9%.

I used Home Depot as an example. For Home depot to report "3.4% of our sales are power tools" is not misleading if that is how their sales break out. It doesn't matter if the people buying them also buy other things. Indeed, percentage of sales and percentage or revenue are commonly used statistics.

What you are asking is the equivalent of saying, "Home Depot should be reporting the percentage of their customers that bought a power tool." As a business owner, I cannot think, for one minute, what I would do with that statistic. I CAN understand why pro-life activists want that to be the published number.

For the record, PP says they saw 2.4M patients, so 13.9% of their patients are there for abortions - which is about in-line with their median projected revenue percentages.

[carpedm9587]

It is to be hand waved away as a "right wing meme" even though both sources noting how the whole 3% figure is a sham are unquestionably liberal.

I said nothing about a "meme"

[Cow Poke]

Planned Parenthood is the largest single provider of ALL reproductive health services…including legal abortions. This is a good thing, a much-needed health service for the women of America.

There are expanding abortions and reducing other services. That is NOT a good thing.

ETA: And I noted you neglected to cite a source for your claim. Lemme guess --- Planned Parenthood's own website again?

[carpedm9587]

There are expanding abortions and reducing other services. That is NOT a good thing.

ETA: And I noted you neglected to cite a source for your claim. Lemme guess --- Planned Parenthood's own website again?

Again - fun with statistics. Warren's statement is positioned here as if it is false, compared to numbers like 1% of this service and 2% of that service. What she actually says is "women who cannot get that service anywhere else...go to planned parenthood." There is nothing inconsistent about the statement and those numbers. Apparently, 99% of this service and 98% of that service are obtained by women who CAN get them elsewhere (local doctor, local hospital, etc.). Who are the women who cannot? Apparently 80% of their clientele are people who live at below 150% of the poverty level - so they are generally serving the poorest women in our nation.

I truly dislike it when either side (and the pro-choice people do it as well) uses this kind of technique to make a point. I think we should at least be intellectually honest in our debates/discussions.

[Sparko]

I was a bit suspicious of the "facts" of the $50 million number, and was doing some digging into that. Interestingly enough, I found this...

If the NRA owns Republicans, Planned Parenthood owns Democrats

Some excellent points there....

The NRA isn't government subsidized like PP is. If PP is donating to political campaigns with taxpayer money, that seems illegal.

[Sparko]

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/get-care/our-services

If their services are being paid for by taxes and they have enough left over to donate $50 million to the democrats, then they don't need any government subsidies.

[Cow Poke]

For the record, PP says they saw 2.4M patients, so 13.9% of their patients are there for abortions - which is about in-line with their median projected revenue percentages.

So, you take the nation's single largest abortion provider at their word? "They say" and you buy it?

[Sparko]

As best I can tell - this is not Planned Parenthood the healthcare provider - it is Planned Parenthood the PAC. You will find a list of the people who donated to the PAC, and the list of people the PAC money went to here. As best I can tell, the donations were specifically for political support - not for the day-to-day business of Planned Parenthood.

Again, if people can donate that much to the PAC, why does the "healthcare provider" need government money? Why can't those supporters donate to the healthcare provider?

And they are in reality the SAME organization.

[Cow Poke]

Planned Parenthood and Mammograms...

[Cow Poke]

Planned Parenthood and Mammograms...

And then she flat out lies and says she never claimed that Planned Parenthood does Mammograms.

So, we should TOTALLY trust Planned Parenthood's claims as to what service they provide and in what proportion.

[carpedm9587]

The NRA isn't government subsidized like PP is. If PP is donating to political campaigns with taxpayer money, that seems illegal.

The PAC is donating - not PP

[carpedm9587]

If their services are being paid for by taxes and they have enough left over to donate $50 million to the democrats, then they don't need any government subsidies.

The PAC is notating...not PP

[Cow Poke]

The PAC is notating...not PP

Planned Parenthood found a Trump-Like way to move money around to protect their interests. Money is fungible. The supporters/directors/managers/operators of Planned Parenthood have the Democratic Party in their pocket.

But do keep spinning!

[carpedm9587]

Again, if people can donate that much to the PAC, why does the "healthcare provider" need government money? Why can't those supporters donate to the healthcare provider?

And they are in reality the SAME organization.

No - a PAC is a separate entity - despite the same name. They clearly are trying to champion PP (one of many), but they exist for a different reason: to promote policies that will make it possible for PP to continue to receive its funding. $50M is about one tenth of the $568 what PP receives from government funds, and already raises $630M from private donors, so even if all of the donors shifted their donations to PP instead of the PAC, it would be a drop in the bucket.

I had found the Planned Parenthood PAC donation data on Open Secrets, but I cannot seem to find the link again. If I find it, I'll post it.

[carpedm9587]

Planned Parenthood found a Trump-Like way to move money around to protect their interests. Money is fungible. The supporters/directors/managers/operators of Planned Parenthood have the Democratic Party in their pocket.

But do keep spinning!

I cannot find the link again, but the PP PAC donations are publicly available and on Open Secrets - as is the disbursement of those funds. No spinning is required - unless you are trying to spin a conspiracy theory that PP is funneling funds to individual donors to donate to the PAC. If that is what you are proposing, then I'd like to see the supporting data. Otherwise - all that would be is a conspiracy theory.

But I do agree with your last statement - PP is popular among Democrats, and a Democrat speaking against them would probably not survive very long. PP basically enjoys the same relationship to the Democratic party that the NRA enjoys to the Republican party, AFAICT.