this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2025
248 points (98.1% liked)

Data is Beautiful

1487 readers
3 users here now

Be respectful

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
 
top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Can we please always link to the original data?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago

The US is on track to implementing the Euthanasia Coaster.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Whoa, wtf is Polandball doing?
I didn't know such differences still existed (not counting USA ofc).

[–] CitizenKong 4 points 6 days ago

Poland has the worst air pollution in the whole of Europe. For one, they still have a lot of coal plants but even more importantly, a lot of homes have never been modernized and still heat with coal too. On top of that, many cars are also old and dirty.

[–] Atlas_ 2 points 6 days ago

Australia is definitely not counting deaths due to drop bears

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago

Too chilly hot to chilly chill.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

Not to worry, it’ll soon dip back down as the Almighty, who is also the Invisible Hand Of The Free Market, wills

[–] [email protected] 53 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I don't think I've ever seen what appears to be a line graph loop back on itself.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 week ago

Visualise it as a 3d graph seen from the top.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

But in this graph it's correct, isn't it?

A bit of a strange choice of axis, but technically it's correct, I think.
We see how during COVID people died earlier although expenses went up (didn't check the dates, but I guess that's the thing?), and afterwards expenses went down, but people grow older again
Or do I completely misunderstand this?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago

Yeah, it's correct. What they did is, for every year they place a dot with respect to x and y axis, then connected the dots. An unusual graph, but works well for this situation, IMO.

[–] angrystego 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I don't think they're cringing, this is perfectly correct.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

By the definition:

A function f from a set X to a set Y is an assignment of one element of Y to each element of X.

~/s~

[–] InfiniteFlow 12 points 6 days ago

This is not a function graph, though. It is a Connected Scatterplot.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 days ago

I have a degree in math and I'm not cringing

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Can you guess when HMOs became a thing (and Blue Cross converted from not-for-profit to for-profit)?

[–] Balthazar 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 days ago

I was asking rhetorically since the graph makes it pretty obvious, but actually re-reading this article it's a bit more complex than I recalled. There was basically some legislation in the mid 1970s that made them possible, the model grew through the 80s, but by the late 80s low-rent HMOs had taken over, and a crippling combo of regulation (to create new barriers to entry) and deregulation (for the existing guys) basically cemented the for-profit HMO/PPO providers that we all know and love (haha) by the 1990s. Had we held out for another decade we probably would have seen socialized medicine by the Clinton-era, but instead we got this graph, where we pay more and get less than everyone else, and half the country thinks it's a great idea.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

INTERNATIONAL DOLLAR (PPP)

COUNTRY MONEY (GDP)