In "More On Health Care Predictions," Megan McArdle expends many, many unnecessary words to attack her enemies, the liberal bloggers. For all of life is a pissing contest between yourself and your peers, attempting to one-up them and get their attention. McArdle is not yet reduced to staring at photos of politicians until she sees a hidden picture like Ann Althouse, but she's getting there.
McArdle discusses cost and benefit and accountability but she does not discuss people, whom she reduces to numbers on a balance sheet. McArdle thinks people exist to maximize their economic potential. She doesn't have the faintest clue that we exist to love and be loved, and to give of yourself to your fellow man is the greatest privilege on earth.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I have my doubts about our government's ability to do this thing properly, but if done properly, even this right-leaning, not-very-good bill is far better than nothing.
But I have a question for Ms McArdle: if the numbers are so bad, then how is it that all those other countries -- ie, all "advanced" nations and a boatload of not-so-advanced ones too -- manage so well? They say "Swordfish!" first or what?
Basically she says that Europe has a lower standard of living and people just get less health care. She believes whole-heartedly in American Exceptionalism.
Good gravy. Let's see ... all European countries have better roads, lots & lots of paid holidays & vacation time for its inhabitants, much better help wrt higher-education costs. Some countries over there will even subsidize things like educational do-overs if you feel the need to change horses in mid-stream.
We have a crumbling infrastructure in every direction you happen to look, people going into crippling debt to go to college & no required paid holidays whatever.
& those comparisons are just off the top of my head.
Hasn't she spent any time in Europe? Or are all those "chaps" simply for show?
My two biggest financial concerns are health care and college. (High taxes as well, something McArdle only worries about if corporations are paying them, they would be easy to manage without the first two.)
McArdle has no idea of anything. She thinks that because we own more stuff (!) that we are richer than Europeans, even though it's cheap crap bought on credit. She is unreal.
And she is considered an intellectual!
You know, I'm too lazy to find the source (Crooks & Liars had the post I'm thinking of, I *think*), but US corporations pay a pittance in taxes -- like 300 billion vis a vis the 1.2 trillion that working stiffs have to come up with. Something horrendous like that. Given the sorts of profits that most American-based "big businesses" show, I'd go with Eisenhower tax rates in a NY minute if I were dictator for a day.
Everything -- everything -- is skewed against the "little guy" now, and it's a damn shame.
I try to read her and the comments, but her arguments are just snippy invocations of jargon and statistics I have no reason to believe, while the comments are mainly the usual smug chorus of happily victimized debate club poseurs.
By the way, has anyone ever pointed out that "libertarianism" is a radical viewpoint, and that The Atlantic might just as well have her job occupied by a communist? Having a libertarian in charge of your economics desk is like having an Orthodox rabbi in charge of your barbecue department, and hoping he fosters "dialogue."
Fortunately for them she's an opportunist, and the Atlantic can depend on her to do whatever puts money in her pocket.
Post a Comment