tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post7791708533296000465..comments2023-12-20T04:18:41.617-06:00Comments on The Hunting of the Snark: Pay My Bills, SuckerSusan of Texashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00076915322771385454noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-60082146069461461782009-08-03T03:34:38.878-05:002009-08-03T03:34:38.878-05:00Until this past week, I had no idea that not being...Until this past week, I had no idea that not being able to sell one's organs was such a great injustice and huge problem. Gosh. <br /><br />Thanks, Susan, for a very thorough rundown. I had read her the-old-and-sick-are-lucky crap years back dissected at Sadly, No, but I went back to read her posts. Holy crap. As Jesse Taylor put it, "she’s wrong in ways that require a 10:1 energy-to-stupid ratio to correct." She generally argues from a theoretical perspective and ignores reality, but even then, it's rarely solid or thorough theoretically. It's more glibertarian free association, working from Randian conclusions backwards, and using really wacky (and sometimes convoluted) arguments along the way. When she's called on it, she loves the 'you guys, what I meant to say was...' I guess it's a bit better than Jonah Goldberg claiming every refutation and debunk proves his point. We all have our starting points, but McArdle will wade into issues without doing even basic research or thinking things through – and sometimes cops the attitude that she's a bold, independent (and intelligent) thinker, unlike her critics. I found that particularly annoying when she tried that in response to Hilzoy, of all people (when Hilzoy was politely smacking McArdle down repeatedly over the course of a few weeks earlier this year). <br /><br />For instance, she's contemplating some very complex system to "peg the money to the suffering the disease causes, rather than the cost of treating the disease," whatever the hell that means (as clever pseudonym noted upthread). Why bother? Why not just move to single payer, or one of the other effective systems used in other countries? Why not pool the risk to lower costs - and because a purely <a href="http://blog.badtux.net/2009/07/why-is-health-care-insurance-different.html" rel="nofollow">free market</a> health care system means anyone who's not wealthy who get certain diseases will die otherwise? In terms of fair "cost" according to ability to pay, a government health program funded in part through a progressive tax system does that without resorting to Megan's "classes" and with much more accuracy and ease. Why not look at any of a number of systems that work fairly well, and look at why they do so? Oh, wait, empirical analysis and libertarianism often don't mix that well. <br /><br />There are many ways to dissect and rebut McArdle, but I think Ezra Klein was right when he essentially said she's simply not interested in solving problems in any serious way. If your goal actually is to provide health care to people better and cheaper, for instance, you're simply not going to go the routes she does. Like Richard Cohen, McArdle really just is a set of <i>attitudes</i> who often can't form a coherent argument and has little connection to the reality-based community. I don't like to ascribe everything to demographics, but I've never seen much from her that wasn't the usual privileged, self-interested glibertarian pap. <br /><br /> It's a travesty anyone's paying her for such an unrelenting flow of crap, but I really have been enjoying this round of smackdowns. So thanks again!Batocchiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02193752396025012825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-7635209364574196302009-08-01T13:06:38.891-05:002009-08-01T13:06:38.891-05:00If two people wish to make a mutually beneficial e...<i>If two people wish to make a mutually beneficial exchange, then no one else has any business interfering with it.</i><br /><br />Exactly, I never understood why they banned slavery. Just liberal lefties and their intolerance, really. Their personal, subjective values.Andrewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-25647779614156106542009-07-30T17:21:25.204-05:002009-07-30T17:21:25.204-05:00No, I believe that the standard is, if there is no...No, I believe that the standard is, if there is no victim, there is no crime. This is often paraphrased from Oliver Wendell Holmes as, "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins." If two people wish to make a mutually beneficial exchange, then no one else has any business interfering with it. Murder is obviously not voluntary for the person being killed, who is thus a victim, and therefore murder is obviously a crime. The "rule of law" is just a means by which men in power make criminals of us all, by writing down arbitrary rules backed by threat of force, even where there are NO victims, like these cases:<br /><br />http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/07/21/heritage-house-law/<br /><br />Organ markets are a means to facilitate the kinds of completely voluntary exchanges I was defending, and forcibly interposing yourself and threatening these people with violence or imprisonment because you don't like what they're doing makes THEM the victims, their rights are being violated, you're swinging your fist right at their nose when they've done nothing to harm you, except in Susan's case, making a decision she finds morally questionable and incompatible with her personal, subjective values.<br /><br />That's common among lefty liberals, they promote diversity, so long as it deviates no more than one tenth of one percent from their narrow, politically correct ideology. Their peans to tolerance are just lip service paid to a very small, superficial range of ideas and behaviors.<br /><br />Truth be told, lockstep obedience in thought and deed is what they really want, and they have no compunction about using the guns of the state to make that happen. Not that they're any different than conservatives in that respect, it's just the conservatives are more honest about that fact.<br /><br />Anyway, I only responded because I was asked a question. I'll not comment again unless it is in response to another direct question, as I'm not really a regular reader of this blog and only came here via the comment section of an article Radley Balko had linked on his site.Dylbozhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14941393707177351309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-30727904133708641952009-07-30T15:06:39.151-05:002009-07-30T15:06:39.151-05:00Dylboz,
You honestly think it's some kind of c...Dylboz,<br />You honestly think it's some kind of contradiction to say you believe in personal freedom, yet still believe in the rule of law? Do you think it's unreasonable to say people should be free to do as they choose, within limits? That's like contending that believing in freedom means you'd be a hypocrite if you didn't think it was okay for a person to murder if they so wished.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-13696851458394469962009-07-30T13:24:57.920-05:002009-07-30T13:24:57.920-05:00Oh, and glad to see you begrudgingly admit that yo...Oh, and glad to see you begrudgingly admit that you misconstrued Megan's writing in the worst possible light, even though it was pretty clear what she meant. Free-for-all clearly refers to a walk-in, first come, first served clinic with no appointments, multiple doctors and triage like an ER. They're commonly referred to as "Doc-in-a-box" clinics, which was also THE TITLE of her post. "Anarchic?" I guess.<br /><br />Finally, only on the loony left can providing an opportunity by ENDING its forcible prohibition and REMOVING the threat of punishment from those who choose to do it be considered "coercion." Yet that is what Susan thinks providing an opportunity for organ markets is, literally "forcing" the poor to choose which body parts to sell. As if. Apparently, she's more comfortable "forcing" them to stay poor, by depriving them of this opportunity to make money and help those in need, but at least they retain their "dignity" in her eyes, and they wont be moving into her neighborhood with their newly earned wealth, either.<br /><br />Dillon, sorry to misspell your name, people do that to me all the time, but maybe it was a little entertaining, no?<br /><br />Cheerio, chaps, I'm done here, no minds are a-changing, just glad to see that cleared up. You wont soon catch me on your blog again. Good day.Dylbozhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14941393707177351309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-66969976553469282612009-07-30T13:12:38.796-05:002009-07-30T13:12:38.796-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Dylbozhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14941393707177351309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-87787313789630081552009-07-30T13:07:31.731-05:002009-07-30T13:07:31.731-05:00Dillion, I am not your dancing monkey, if you'...Dillion, I am not your dancing monkey, if you're so bored, go entertain yourself.<br /><br />Kathy... Uh, how, exactly? I am consistently applying my principles, not twisting logic backward upon itself into a pretzel of confusion like Susan here. In the same breath, she says she supports freedom, yet endorses a coercive prohibition on organ markets, because they offend her very subjective values and emotions. She thinks everyone should be free to do exactly what she thinks, to conform to her moral standards, and if they don't like, they can go to jail, just like that New Jersey Rabbi will.<br /><br />It's an ugly solipsism backed up by state force. She repeatedly denies the validity of any other choices besides the ones she'd make, even if they are voluntary and mutually beneficial. Then, for good measure, she disingenuously redefines "coercion" to include just the kind of remunerative exchange she finds objectionable, even though it's freely, even eagerly agreed to by both parties. Can't have that, can we?<br /><br />According to Susan, people are just too stupid to make their own decisions, especially those moronic po' folks, whose lack of financial resources renders them unable to calculate risk versus reward, so wise old Susan better step in and make their decisions for them, at government gunpoint, no less. That's compassion! But then, that's always how you "liberals" roll, isn't it? We're free to be just like thee!Dylbozhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14941393707177351309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-39252095140932836572009-07-30T10:04:11.339-05:002009-07-30T10:04:11.339-05:00Yes, anon, it's ambiguous. And maybe unimporta...Yes, anon, it's ambiguous. And maybe unimportant. It's not like McArdle has ever been unclear before, and she's so very wrong on so many matters that hypocricy is the least of her problems.<br /><br />It's kind of funny if true, though. Although we have ample evidence she thinks the rules don't apply to her anyway.Susan of Texashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00076915322771385454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-33985781628275175862009-07-30T09:55:37.255-05:002009-07-30T09:55:37.255-05:00A "free-for-all" clinic may not be the s...A "free-for-all" clinic may not be the same as a free clinic. Maybe she went to a "docs in a box" place. The paragraph is unclear.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-7954988115930572292009-07-30T09:03:02.661-05:002009-07-30T09:03:02.661-05:00How is it that a rich spoiled brat like MMcA has g...How is it that a rich spoiled brat like MMcA has gone to such crappy primary care doctors? I am way below her class/economic markers, and I go to a practice where I am shuffled among 3-4 different docs, but they know who I am and my basic history (guess they take a moment to read my chart before walking in). I smell foul, as in McA is just making shit up to make it seem as though she has a point.jpnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-60921452944247471182009-07-30T00:45:02.714-05:002009-07-30T00:45:02.714-05:00"I could not possibly imagine a more textbook..."I could not possibly imagine a more textbook example of doublethink and self-imposed cognitive dissonance..."<br /><br />But...you're soaking in it!Kathyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03176801494652946278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-12698528532486080872009-07-29T22:54:57.708-05:002009-07-29T22:54:57.708-05:00Wow, doctors hand out freebies? THe little sign by...Wow, doctors hand out freebies? THe little sign by my docotr's window say differently. Mostly it says "Pay Before You Leave."<br /><br />It's funny, I can think of better criticisms of the post than I read here.Susan of Texashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00076915322771385454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-83863921840259605162009-07-29T21:49:26.291-05:002009-07-29T21:49:26.291-05:00It's a pretty important point, although hypocr...It's a pretty important point, although hypocrisy from McArdle wouldn't exactly be a novel event. I've done the city's walk-up immunizations, which were given in a drug store.Susan of Texashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00076915322771385454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-27064186518977527432009-07-29T21:04:55.671-05:002009-07-29T21:04:55.671-05:00"one of those free-for-all clinics where you ..."one of those free-for-all clinics where you can get in to see a doctor immediately..."<br /><br />The meaning of "free-for-all" is ambiguous, but if you can get in to see a doctor immediately, then it sounds like it's NOT a "free-for-all" in which there is anarchic triage. It sounds like there's no one waiting and doctors to spare, however second-rate by MM's standards.<br /><br />In fact I doubt where there is any clinic in the US where you can get in "immediately," since whether they're "free" or conducted as a "free-for-all" they're always over-booked and have people in the waiting room. You can't get through if there's anarchy, and you can't get through immediately if they're at-no-cost.<br /><br />Either way you cut it, it's bad writing. And writing is all she does. In her effort to be breezy and amusing she's obscure. Defend that.Mr. Wonderfulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-19055019307333659682009-07-29T20:59:23.687-05:002009-07-29T20:59:23.687-05:00Two things about Medicaid and assets:
1) If some...Two things about Medicaid and assets: <br /><br />1) If someone has divested assets in the previous five years, Medicaid will not pay for long-term care until the assets are returned.<br /><br />2) Medicaid recovers costs it incurs from beneficiaries who shelter assets (in Medicaid Trusts and the like) before inheritance can be taken. The advantage there is that Medicaid pays significantly less for services than private parties do, so the total bill is lower. Of course, that knowledge would only make Megan more adamant that people be made to liquidate assets first, rather than getting a GOVERNMENT DISCOUNT.CaptBackslapnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-20124256443430142422009-07-29T20:20:17.625-05:002009-07-29T20:20:17.625-05:00Dylboz is boring me to tears. I demand trolls that...Dylboz is boring me to tears. I demand trolls that are worthy of my attention.<br /><br />(where is Mousey when you need her?)Dillonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-73024187340307810552009-07-29T19:53:22.742-05:002009-07-29T19:53:22.742-05:00WOW, it's clear that you misunderstood the ter...WOW, it's clear that you misunderstood the term "free-for-all," referring to the unorganized and haphazard way that patients are triaged without appointment as a statement about how much the clinic costs in order to paint her in the worst possible light. You're a very confused woman, Susan.<br /><br />I loved your comment about people being free to do whatever they want, except, apparently, things like selling their organs, or offering money to entice donors to save their lives, because it offends your personal aesthetic sensibilities and seems unseemly or "exploitative."<br /><br />I could not possibly imagine a more textbook example of doublethink and self-imposed cognitive dissonance. Nice job.Dylbozhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14941393707177351309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-44086719551838526002009-07-29T19:48:05.776-05:002009-07-29T19:48:05.776-05:00If a service is provided for free, that is the pri...If a service is provided for free, that is the price of the service. Using that service doesn't make a hypocrite out of her anymore than taking a free sample of salami while shopping at the Costco does. If the clinic is state supported, that's different, because it's subsidized with the extorted earnings of other taxpayers, but she didn't say that it was. Until that bit of information is resolved, you've written a whole lot about nothing.Dylbozhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14941393707177351309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-57314580705064836132009-07-29T18:35:23.018-05:002009-07-29T18:35:23.018-05:00McArdle might just be the world's crappiest wr...McArdle might just be the world's crappiest writer instead of a hypocrite. <br /><br />Is there a reason she can't be both?BillCinSDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-19527886461867026642009-07-29T17:27:14.304-05:002009-07-29T17:27:14.304-05:00"I was even more militant..."
I'll ..."I was even more militant..."<br /><br />I'll bet you any amount her parents or someone else paid for her life-or-death medications and doctor visits.<br /><br />I expect the parents or 'other' also subsidized her gas and rent and clothing.<br /><br />And all the time she was whining about... everything. And blaming the Poor. She really is a sickening person, and a really really CRAPPY writer. <br /><br />"...antimalarial meds Ho!" is exactly correct.Kathyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03176801494652946278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-42805500841683871142009-07-29T16:13:55.229-05:002009-07-29T16:13:55.229-05:00I'm not sure the clinic thing is worth a post,...I'm not sure the clinic thing is worth a post, but the quotes are interesting. She doesn't want the poor to go without but she wants the middle class to pay through the nose for healthcare? Wants corporations to pay for health care? She's ideologically confused, to say the least. It's government=bad, nothing else.<br /><br />To me the funniest part about all this (if true) is that the only people that care will be McArdle's commenters.Susan of Texashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00076915322771385454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-38881719399719939982009-07-29T15:59:17.260-05:002009-07-29T15:59:17.260-05:00And as for that idiotic question re the benefits o...And as for that idiotic question re the benefits of a primary care physician: if nothing else, the primary has in his or her office your medical history, including your history with that office. The clinic or "urgent (sic) care" doesn't. Feel like waiting a day or a week while you get your primary to fax (or email) the info to the clinic? Be my guest.<br /><br />God, she really is a nitwit, isn't she. Educated, intelligent, and a nitwit.Mr. Wonderfulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-4103703218597190802009-07-29T15:55:43.215-05:002009-07-29T15:55:43.215-05:00Society (which MM seems to regard as a bunch of pe...Society (which MM seems to regard as a bunch of people she doesn't really want to hang with) has a stake in a person getting treatment for diabetes rather than driving around in a nice car. If the diabetic suffers a blood sugar plunge and drives her nice car into someone (a Megan McArdle, say), when treating the disease and doing without the car would have prevented it, which is preferable? <br /><br />If the diabetic can afford to ignore her symptoms and spend her own money on a car, then she can do that. If society is asked to subsidize or pay for one or the other, the choice is obvious--to everyone except MM and her fellow Imagitarians.Mr. Wonderfulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-36818110904107056142009-07-29T15:55:22.453-05:002009-07-29T15:55:22.453-05:00"why don't we peg the money to the suffer..."why don't we peg the money to the suffering the disease causes, rather than the cost of treating the disease?"<br /><br />I've read that four times now and I still have no frigging idea what in the world she's trying to say. Help me out here?clever pseudonymnoreply@blogger.com