Last updated on 2019-12-01
My local paper runs this odd little online poll asking “Is the second 2019 Market Facilitation Program payment large enough?”
The poll widgeteer, Civic Science, is the same outfit that put out the infamous trick poll about Arabic numerals earlier this year. They’re more interested in collecting marketing data than actionable public opinion data—my click on the MPF question opened consumer questions asking about brands, my attendance at sporting events, and my number of children. Blech.
The question itself is poorly designed. It uses the arcane technocratic term for the farm welfare checks Trump is using to bribe farmers into ignoring the continued destruction he’s wreaking on their finances with his tariff-mania. Actual social science research would first establish how many people have heard the term and know what it entails, which would serve as useful information in itself for understanding public awareness of the socialist extremes of the current fake-Republican Administration.
The question includes a policy falsehood: there is no one MFP “payment”. MFP sets different rates in different counties, with different payment amounts to different farmers. The phrasing of the question thus poses a question that knowledgeable respondents may not be able to answer with a simple binary click choice. “The payment” to one poor farmer in one poor county may not be “large enough”, while the average payment of $183,331 that is going to each of the top 1% of MFP recipients may be far too large.
“Large enough” also fails to capture the multiple levels at which one might analyze this policy. Is it large enough to make farmers fully whole for the damage done them by reckless Executive Branch trade decisions? Probably not. Is it large enough to keep farmers rationalizing their racist, reactionary vote for Trump?
This results of this online poll are worth about as much for public policy discussion as Kristi Noem’s declaration that she’s on meth. But when success is measured in clicks rather than intelligent, informed conversation, who cares?
Well, isn’t that just the cutest little name for GOP wealth transfer, corporate socialism, bribe… Bless their little hearts! !@#%^&*
Mr. H, do you ever measure the success of your blog on clicks? When you sell advertising to people like Mr. Stan or the Democratic gatherers at the Royal Fork (a fine, gluttonous restaurant, in grudznick’s opinion) to they measure in clicks. I don’t understand the value of a click, but just wondering…
It would be interesting to see the response if the money was referred to as “Farm Welfare.”
“Large enough”? Large enough for WHAT? My stats and soc teachers would give me an F if that undefined screwy question was presented on a proposed study questionnaire. A respondent would have to guess what that means. Large enough to make anybody happy? NO. Not large enough for farmers to recoup their losses and certainly not going to make grumping townspeople who think it’s coming directly out of their paychecks happy either.
Large enough to make me vote for Trump? No, forget that one, too. Not gonna happen.
And I suppose I can quit looking for anything in the mailbox now, too.