Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

TheCavis t1_ivq3z4k wrote

It’s a map error. Unofficial results from the town website.

216 blank, 2323 yes, 444 no.

It looks like they entered it as “yes, no, blank” instead of “blank, yes, no” when they made the map.

134

nrvs_hbt OP t1_ivqohbi wrote

Wow thanks so much for digging and finding this out!

15

Gravity_Beetle t1_ivqhomj wrote

This is clearly the answer. I have encountered similar transcription errors in voting records before -- it doesn't seem to be that uncommon.

7

TheCavis t1_ivrkq9j wrote

I agree on it not being uncommon. I ran across a bunch of weird results from Charlton last night that had a similar issue, except there were errors in both the unofficial results (since updated) and the map results in different places. It gave 5000-1 result for one of the questions, which is a lot more obvious than this sort of error.

It’s just tough to perfectly parse this much data from this many towns and hard to find errors like this unless you’re specifically looking for specific weirdness in a particular area on a particular question. It all gets cleared up for the official results, so it’s just a matter of slightly annoying us impatient people who need our data now.

2

iTZBLaSToFFTiMe t1_ivpl3ab wrote

In Olde English, “Barrington” means “Town of Dentists”

127

SouthShoreSerenade t1_ivpmf7e wrote

Well, the dentists are overwhelmingly in favor of Q2. So maybe you're mistaken and Barrington means "Town of Insurers"?

87

wkomorow t1_ivpuj09 wrote

The only thing I can think of is the American Institute of Economic Research is located there. It is a libertarian thinktank. Maybe they canvased the area with placards, etc. The area itself is very blue so it should have gone the way of the rest of the Berkshires, so that really is an oddity.

57

nrvs_hbt OP t1_ivpvb4j wrote

Thank you for providing an actual answer! You could be right, although it's such an anomaly that at this point I'm more likely to believe the Globe made a mistake in reporting.

23

ManifestDestinysChld t1_ivqludj wrote

I live in GB. The AIER has not placarded the town pushing a radical pro-dentist agenda.

Quite the contrary.

There are others - more professional lawn signs - that say things like "Our water looks and smells like shit." And it's true!

6

dlovestoski t1_ivqit6t wrote

My girlfriend from GB lives a few blocks from this and had no idea that it existed.

2

ManifestDestinysChld t1_ivr521k wrote

I like ride my motorcycle through the AIER campus and rev it really obnoxiously loud.

(Sorry to your gf.)

2

PtrWalnuts t1_ivq9uco wrote

Today I learned I never want to visit Great Barrington.

Just so everyone knows who might’ve missed it. It was a joke.

0

wkomorow t1_ivqasrk wrote

The community is really nice and like the rest of the Berkshires quite liberal and welcoming. Main street is confusing to drive down, there is this strange curve in the road. The institute dates back to the 30s.

My thought was that people do not always understand the complexities of some of the ballot questions and if you see vote no signs all over place, you might vote no.

7

PtrWalnuts t1_ivqeuhl wrote

I'm just teasing actually like The Berkshires a lot. I didn't realize there was a colony of nut jobs in great barrington.

2

nrvs_hbt OP t1_ivpkcas wrote

As shown in this screenshot, Great Barrington is the only town so far to vote majority No on 2, and it was by a huge margin.

Why is this? Does the CEO of Delta Dental live there or something?

21

yodatsracist t1_ivq58rj wrote

There's a possibility that the numbers are just flipped, and which number was for which position got flipped at some point in the chain. Maybe the Town Clerk reported that issue wrong to the State and it will get fixed before it's certified, or maybe it got reported wrong to whatever data service the the Globe is using (assuming these aren't directly from the Secretary of State's website).

6

Quincyperson t1_ivps1mv wrote

Because they don’t have teeth anyways

18

[deleted] t1_ivq4jgh wrote

Obviously you’ve never been there. Their noses are stuck up way higher than yours.

5

October7_7 t1_ivq5xut wrote

His flair is that he's from the Greater Boston area, the state ceases to exist West of Worcester for the geographically challenged out there.

3

Doctrina_Stabilitas t1_ivpsohx wrote

apparently this town has its own currency too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares

11

jesstitution t1_ivpxjum wrote

I live in GB and use BerkShares, so this other person has some other agenda.

I also voted yes on 2, so I don’t know what happened there…

8

[deleted] t1_ivpsxrq wrote

[deleted]

−4

Doctrina_Stabilitas t1_ivptlcl wrote

the website for berkshares does list a decent number of companies in Great Barrington that does accept the bills though

https://berkshares.org/directory/?select=&lp_s_loc=Great+Barrington&lp_s_tag=&lp_s_cat=&s=home&post_type=listing

but maybe it's something that's died out since 2006?

6

dementedmunster t1_ivu9ut7 wrote

It's used less often than it was in years past, but it is still around. A digital Berkshares currency was just launched this year, too.

1

Relative_Professor48 t1_ivpuaij wrote

l

−11

dementedmunster t1_ivu8ycf wrote

Hey, as one of the owners of one of those businesses (Yellow House Books), YES, we do take Berkshares. I also know the co-op takes them, because that's where we spend ours, lol.

We have the book "The First 175 Years of Crane Papermaking" in our local book section, if anyone gets really interested in the topic!

1

Mr-To-Hi t1_ivpyr3g wrote

Doesn't pittsfield/dalton print the money? Or have they moved?

2

MonsieurReynard t1_ivqiexk wrote

Live two towns over. The reason is we have no teeth around here. So why should we pay for yours?

I jest of course. It's a lovely place to live and most people here are pretty community-oriented. And while we probably have fewer teeth than Boston, we have enough to get the job done.

8

Relative_Professor48 t1_ivpt18h wrote

Great Barrington is one of the towns in the Berkshires that are full of rich old people so makes sense they voted this way

2

Lil_Brown_Bat t1_ivqdp1i wrote

What is the source of this map? I know I've seen election results by town in previous years but i can't find it this year for some reason. My usually excellent google fu is failing me.

2

nrvs_hbt OP t1_ivqojks wrote

Boston Globe

2

Lil_Brown_Bat t1_ivr9lem wrote

Ugh, paywalled :(

3

nrvs_hbt OP t1_ivrg49z wrote

Download the extension EditThisCookie and use it to trial-and-error block cookies until you find the ones that get rid of the paywall while still rendering the content correctly

1

saloondweller t1_ivqc7u6 wrote

Everyone out that way is kind of a moron tbh...my work has a location in Sheffield and the bs I've had to listen to from town officials makes my brain melt. Everyone in the Berkshires pretends they are liberal until the second it's time to actually prove it with money and effort

0

jmfranklin515 t1_ivpzm67 wrote

There’s a town in MA called Great Barrington? I think you’re just making that up.

−8

nick-j- t1_ivq1ols wrote

It’s better when you realize that Great Barrington was called that because there was another Barrington in Massachusetts (the one now in Rhode Island) when the town was created. So it wasn’t New Barrington, they went with Great Barrington because it’s that much better.

10

Irishfury86 t1_ivq78ea wrote

Where do you live?

1

jmfranklin515 t1_ivqhmnz wrote

I’ve lived in Bourne, Worcester, Milford, and Bellingham, in that order.

1

Irishfury86 t1_ivr18j6 wrote

All of those places have equally ridiculous names as Great Barrington. I mean they’re all named after places in England.

3

dangott04 t1_ivpz42a wrote

Great Barrington voter here. I’m all for regulating dental insurers, but the 83% figure seems arbitrary, not based on data, insurers will have numerous ways to meet the 83% threshold, and there’s no guarantee that this will in any way lower costs or improve overall dental health.

−12

louderchowder t1_ivq0n9m wrote

You’re a shill. It’s not arbitrary, it’s based on a similar requirement for medical insurance, which has a ratio of 88%

9

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivq0iw0 wrote

What convinced you that it was better to let insurance companies have no regulation in the amount of profit they can make? Like, how do you think an arbitrary number like 83% is worse than letting dental insurance companies charge more in premiums than they actually cover and services annually? Most dental insurance plans charge incredibly high premiums, and you can’t even begin to get major work done until at least the second or third year, by which time unless you’ve paid more in premiums than you are eligible for in the 50-65% coverage in services.

7

sjashe t1_ivq1mjk wrote

I voted no on that, because my dental insurance and plan has been very good and low cost for over 50 years.

Whenever you add more regulation and more laws.. and you get is a higher cost. Just watch what happens to our dental plans now.

I only wish our regular health care worked as well as our dental plans

−4

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivq3nsz wrote

You know what? I don’t think you are telling the truth at all. You’ve only become active in the last year in the MA & NH subs. Are a Jordan Peterson fan. And make really weird assertions about communism.

What low cost plan do you have available to you in Great Barrington?

6

[deleted] t1_ivq4pn3 wrote

Most dental is low cost.

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivq53yl wrote

Lmfao!!!!! Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! Get the fuck out of here shill. You already lost

3

[deleted] t1_ivw4d1t wrote

I pay like $125 a month

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivw8xn0 wrote

Prove it. Show me the paystubs with your address and name blanked. But you better leave the zip code since you are pretending to be from Great Barrington. Or link to the plan. Because you are a liar

Your word means nothing. Evidence is publicly available. Or you could provide your own individual evidence blanking out identifying information. Do it or fuck off. Because you’re a goddamn liar

And show me what benefits you are eligible for at that price. Because it’s nothing more than a scam

1

[deleted] t1_iw2ibln wrote

Seems like a lot of anger over a quote.

https://sqe.deltadentalma.com/Recommended.aspx

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_iw2xkr3 wrote

Yes, I’m so aaaangry. Now you’ve really proved me wrong. Lmao

Those plans every single one of them has a maximum benefit of $1000 a year. MAX! Plus deductibles. And at best cover preventative care and 40-50% of other dental care. Including fillings. But only up to $1000. That’s it’s.

And you STILL didn’t prove that’s what you pay. Nor that the new law wouldn’t make it better.

Go away shill. You lost and you still haven’t shown me anything that backs up your argument. Bye!

1

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivw9qae wrote

So you pay $1500 a year. For what? $75 for an annual exam? X rays every couple of years for $250 every two years? So you spend $1500 a year to get $200 a year in preventative care? What’s your co-pay for that? How much do they cover in other services?

Seriously, come with numbers and proof of those numbers or GTFO. Because you STILL haven’t provided anything but your bullshit word.

1

[deleted] t1_iw2j0sr wrote

That’s a family plan. 4 people.

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_iw2xm9j wrote

Bye shill!

1

[deleted] t1_iw3frus wrote

You need some help. I feel bad for your boyfriend, although, he’s probably as nuts as you are.

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_iw3g0gm wrote

Ohhhhh noooooo…. I’m sooooo hurt. I must be really crazy if some idiot on Reddit resorts to ad hominem attacks. 😂😂😂 That’s honestly pathetic. Bye!

2

sjashe t1_ivu7sm1 wrote

Sorry I don't post to your standard of acceptability.

Peterson is a fascinating speaker, making a great impact on thousands (more than any reddit poster).

As to me, if I've paid more than $30 a year over 50 years on dental costs (beyond the premium, which is <$5 a week), I'ld be surprised (and it was usually a mistake by the dentist where he overcharged.. and I let it go).

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivuc2oz wrote

Prove it. Show me ONE dental plan in MA that has existed for 50 years that costs less than $5 a week and covers enough to only pay $30 a year in co-pays.

There isn’t one, you big fat lying shill. Get the fuck out of here because you already lost.

There has been no plan available in Massachusetts for 50 years that cost less than five dollars a week and covers everything. Prove it or you’re a big fat lying shil.

1

sjashe t1_ivv4svh wrote

Wow.. you are really the example of reddit commenter.

I said I have had insurance here for over 50 years.. first through parents, then through my employer for last 35 years. Im sure the insurer changed many times over the years, but I just checked my paystub and I paid 8.88 for a two week period.

Sorry your life is so tough. I'm saying I like my dental care. Sad that you let this get you so upset, life is too short for that.

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivv6yq9 wrote

Yup. I am a typical Redditor. I know how easy it is to provide evidence. But you refuse to… because you can’t. Honestly, embarrass me! Prove me wrong!

Lmao…. If you can’t stand the typical Redditor this much, then maybe you don’t belong here. Because we all expect evidence. We aren’t stupid, we know what astroturfing is we know what paid shills look like, and we know what trolls look like. This isn’t Facebook. Try somewhere else if you think you can do better.

Or prove me wrong. With evidence besides your invaluable word

Really… prove to me that those numbers ACTUALLY exist.

1

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivv79xs wrote

Seriously, prove it. Blank out your name and address besides zip code, since you are pretending to be from Great Barrington. Show my those paystubs. And link me the the dental plan. It’s publicly available information

1

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivq435g wrote

So you bought dental insurance in MA in 1972? Only 6 years after is became available in MA? And have kept the same insurance company for 50 years? So you must have Delta Dental. THATS you idea of a low cost high benefit plan? Lmao…. No.

3

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivq387m wrote

Could you share that dental plan? I’d certainly appreciate a low cost dental plan that’s existed for 50 years.

But if your’s is already low costs and your benefits equal your premiums, then you wouldn’t have been affected.

1

Watchfull_Hosemaster t1_ivqb1lj wrote

It should be 100% if we're looking for a non-arbitrary number! This bill guarantees them 17% to skim off the top of insurance premiums just for being the middle-man in financial transactions for when we need to get our gums cleaned and our teeth polished.

Amazing that people that are not trained in dentistry can make $17 BY LAW for every $100 we spend for getting root canals and fillings and they are complaining about it. Be grateful for our corrupted system. We could overhaul the entire thing and put them out of business.

2

[deleted] t1_ivr5o6t wrote

[deleted]

1

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivws9z1 wrote

That’s not how math works. 17% doesn’t magically become 40%. And if they can skim that much under the new law, how much were they scamming us for before? Shills are getting sad in their efforts

0

[deleted] t1_ivwt2yz wrote

[deleted]

1

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivzc8tx wrote

What happened to the free market? If costs go up so much, it will be cheaper to just pay for the dental work, and people won’t buy the insurance.

You do realize that they are required to spend 83% of the premiums on services right? Because if premiums go up, the paid for services just as well. You really don’t get this

1

[deleted] t1_ivzf4d2 wrote

[deleted]

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivzmiip wrote

Except that people won’t buy dental insurance that doesn’t make sense for them. And you can’t make a profit if you can’t sell a product. People who need more expensive work can buy the insurance but it won’t make them a profit

Weird how the same requirements have worked for health insurance… but won’t for dental? An unnecessary insurance?

If you can predict how this law will lead to unsustainable premium increases, can you show evidence of where it’s happened before? Peer reviewed studies… NOT just your words. Because you do keep saying the same thing but ignoring the fact that people will drop plans that don’t work for them, AND that it’s worked well for health insurance. Please provide evidence to support your assumed assertions. Otherwise it means nothing

1

[deleted] t1_ivzpcwn wrote

[deleted]

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivzre37 wrote

It’s funny how I provided evidence, but you won’t. Probably because the evidence supports that premiums will not go through the roof. we don’t need to wait a year to see what happens, there’s already data that shows what happens when we pass these kinds of laws. It’s also weird that you were completely interested in debating this point until I asked for evidence and provided some of my own. But it’s cool, you can wait a year to see that I was right

1

[deleted] t1_ivzxxao wrote

[deleted]

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_iw02bmh wrote

I think YOU didn’t read your link. It’s an opinion column. NOT a study. About what health insurance companies want… not about what happens. Lmao

1

[deleted] t1_iw02lo1 wrote

[deleted]

0

MOGicantbewitty t1_iw0365l wrote

Moving the goalpost there real nice.

I want peer reviewed studies showing that the 83% rule leads to unsustainable premium increases. Not an opinion column whose citations include showing the Medicaid costs went up after chiropractic services were added. You didn’t read it.

But go ahead, wait a year. Then come on back and show me how the dental plans in MA are worse. Even use the remind me! bot. Bc I’m done. You aren’t engaging in good faith and I’m bored. Bye!

1

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivzrjc6 wrote

Did you see the other comment? I did provide evidence that shows regulations like these do not increase premiums. With graphs and reputable statistics and everything

1

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivzrr2o wrote

Oh yeah, and that’s not why insurance works. Insurance works because insurers can negotiate lower rates for services on an individual can. So we pay premiums and they pay lower cost, that’s where their profit comes from. Not from people paying worthless insurance that they will never use

1

MOGicantbewitty t1_ivzpows wrote

Here is an article for HR folks about increases in premiums.

Look at the graph based on Dept of Labor statistics showing the increases in total insurance costs. The premiums had a huge spike around 2000, and then dropped substantially and regularly after the ACA (Obamacare) was passed. Even now, premium increases are out paced by inflation. And that’s not considering the added costs to health care with an aging population. The Boomers are getting older and sicker. So, premiums HAVE GONE DOWN since the same law was instituted for health care. Why would it be different for a voluntary insurance that most people wouldn’t need if the premiums got higher than preventative care cost. Please… show me

1

Sayoria t1_ivpxyjp wrote

My assumption is that there's probably 6 teeth in the whole entire town.

−15

[deleted] t1_ivq50p3 wrote

“It’s in the west, so it must be full of rednecks”. Typical Bostonian.

9

Essarray t1_ivq7g9j wrote

And by west they mean like the other side of Worcester

3

kingrobot3rd t1_ivq21on wrote

lol you’d be dead wrong. great barrington is (for the most part) loaded.

8

Irishfury86 t1_ivq7pbd wrote

I’ve met far more hicks on the eastern side of the state.

3

[deleted] t1_ivppzqm wrote

Because the government putting their dirty sticky hands in anything is a bad fucking idea and leads to extra cost through taxation and administration which translates to more cost for you for less. Terrible fucking idea.

−50

A11th3p04n t1_ivpqbmr wrote

You're right! I miss when companies dumped toxic waste in our drinking supply!

35

[deleted] t1_ivpse7u wrote

What’s different now? They inject toxic chemicals into your food, the environment and your body and tell you it’s for your health and it’s not toxic and you just eat that up, literally, just wondering why are dying from cancer after following all the governments advice…. Camp Lejeune is the current headline but let’s not forget about all the food additives the FDA says are great and turn out to be horrible…. So weird….you simpleton

−43

vimgod t1_ivpw7zu wrote

Imagine being this stupid and thinking you're not

11

[deleted] t1_ivq9q8u wrote

Choose to believe what you want. Until one day the government comes and kicks you out of your house to flood your town for the common good.

−2

vimgod t1_ivqaeow wrote

Move to some shithole state like Alabama then. Why stay in mass. Free county. Don't like it, leave

2

[deleted] t1_ivqgbmf wrote

Working on it. But thanks for the well thought out advice.

1

vimgod t1_ivqgwjb wrote

You don't deserve well thought out advice you hick. Please leave the state, we don't want you here

1

[deleted] t1_ivqinwa wrote

😂😂😂 this is a typical liberal response, ignorant and about as eloquent as a dying boar.

You’re a college kid from Georgia calling me a hick? 😂😂😂😂😂😂 nearly pissed myself when I saw that

1

TecumsehSherman t1_ivpwrcn wrote

>Camp Lejeune is the current headline

This is the right wing conspiracy theory darling right now, yes. You outed yourself with that reference.

Out here in the real world, military bases are all a huge environmental issue.

7

[deleted] t1_ivqa9qw wrote

No shit. It’s a headline. It’s not political that military families are suffering because the government lies and treats people like animals.

Something happened in the last two generations where shot head kids got old enough to vote and they think we need the government. It’s supposed to be public service. The governement needs you and your tax money. Now it’s just blatant corruption yet all you Libs keep going down the same path.

I enjoy occasionally framing things less on party lines and I should make a coffee table book of lib reactions - you all love conservatism, as long as it’s not framed that way.

1

FourAM t1_ivq0iji wrote

Yep definitely from Great Barrington

2

neutron_uplink t1_ivpr38r wrote

You can certainly move into the woods of Alaska if big bad govt is so awful. But you wouldn't because you know damn well you need the government. So chill out with the bluster

12

DumbshitOnTheRight t1_ivpsq3v wrote

> You can certainly move into the woods of Alaska if big bad govt is so awful.

Except for Alaska's socialist policy of distributing oil money to all individuals. God-damned communists.

14

neutron_uplink t1_ivpt4m9 wrote

You're right! I guess dude is really only left with Antarctica or maybe Afghanistan

7

[deleted] t1_ivps01b wrote

False. No one needs government, people just like government because it makes them feel all warm and fuzzy that someone is supposed to be looking out for you - they’re not.

−23

neutron_uplink t1_ivptvht wrote

Yes. You. Do. Right now you're using a device that wouldn't exist without federal govt R&D, using electricity regulated by the government (unless you have your own power generation, transmission and storage), the internet (also thanks to govt R&D). And eating food you would have no possibility of obtaining without the government.

What makes you so special that the government needs to "look out for you" in particular? This is a society my friend. You live in it. The government does it's best to provide for all. You are certainly free to unplug and go into the wild, but again, you won't.

15

[deleted] t1_ivq9m70 wrote

Gov’t does it’s best to provide for the government. Private business does the rest.

Hurts my head that people are as dense as you. I blame your parents.

1

Peteostro t1_ivq5mbx wrote

Man I love the day after election day in Massachusetts where it reminds Republicans living here that their voice means sh*t. Every once in a while we toss them a very moderate republican governor and they get their hopes up that they have a chance here. I mean they actually ran a republican candidate with the political views of Diehl here. It’s just F’in hilarious

3

[deleted] t1_ivqadye wrote

What’s funny is any stream of conscious from a liberal. Now that will get a laugh.

1

Peteostro t1_ivqslnk wrote

Another sad day in Mass for you, maybe you should move to Florida. You can be in the Republicans paradise! Why continue to stay cold and sad in liberal Massachusetts?

1