Unless I missed it, I don’t think you addressed my question posed in post #50.
It’s an interesting subject to me because the tone of the health care debate from the right seems to range from ignorant to evil. And that’s not to say that I think that these particular batch of reforms, or in general goverment regulation of health care is necesarily good or an optimal solution. But there’s very little reasoned discussion of the issue. Certainly a case could be made stating the downsides of any particular proposal and the long term implications, etc.
But the people who are loudest on that side of the debate are either ignorant (death panels! government beaurocrats making your medical decisions!), or in some cases much worse, seemingly an actual desire to see people harmed.
I suspect that if you could wave a magic wand, and give everyone equal access to high quality health care with no downsides, there would be a sizable minority of people who would object. They simply hate the idea that the people who they see as inferior to them (due to being poor/irresponsible/whatever) will be getting the same treatment. They seem to actually be comforted or take pleasure from the suffering of those who they view as deserving it.
I don’t know if that’s the case for you. But given that our current system is obviously non-optimal and people suffer for it, the glee with which you celebrate an attempt at reform which could potentially really help people makes me wonder.
Also, it’s funny how you have this naïve notion of “the ruling class” as fat cats sitting around smoking cigars and getting rich off the back of the working man. In reality the people I work for are just as smart and hard-working as I am, they just do different stuff (ie, start companies or investment funds).
SB, I’ll try to write more tonight. In general, you are looking at the issue from the perspective of “should something be done,” whereas my perspective is “is this something the government should do.” I know you generally leaan libertarian, so I find this curious.
If I ever read about someone shooting himself in the ass, my immediate assumption will be that Rand Rover tried to blow his brains out. My next assumption will be that he didn’t miss by all that much.
I have been following the health-care debate for years and I honestly never have encountered that statement before, nor words to that effect. Truly pushing the envelope. I’m in awe (for an Edsel-or-New-Coke value of “awe”).
Actually the left are the ones dealing with reality. The right prefers ideology over actual fact. Looming depression? The sane, reality-based version is to temporarily ramp up govt. spending to create demand. The insane, ideological right’s answer? Cut spending.
It’s profoundly stupid things like that that define the right. The left is far form perfect, but it’s currently the only side that’s actually looking at the real world.
Dude, in a hundred years your cronies are going to drop the jaws of historians. You guys have instituted doctrinal stupidity. It’s amazing how utterly wrong on every-fucking-thing the right is. I don’t know how, but they appear to be doing worse than chance.
I love how you distill tons and tons of economics literature into a prescription to “temporarily” “ramp up” government spending during a “looming” depression. What you don’t know could fill a book (and in fact fills several). Besides, the topic you raise doesn’t even strike at the heart of the fiscal conservative/liberal divide, it’s a side topic about a special situation.
It was but one example of outright, ignorant stupidity embraced by the right.
The right are living in a fantasy world. There are conservative ideas that deserve merit, however, they instead argue garbage that fits ideologically.
For another example, they harp on tort reform and across state lines. They never mention that we’re looking at a couple percent savings from tort reform and massive deregulation from across state lines. Those aren’t answers, they’re stupid ideological bullshit they pretend are answers.
But you’re the expert on stupid ideological bullshit here.
Yes, I’m sure they’ll look back upon the society of today, with its teen pregnancy, STD and abortion rates; the lives lost and ruined by its run away drug problem and the huge amount of crime that comes with it; its impotent educational system; and the millions of kids raising themselves in broken or single-family homes – all of which are the result of liberal influence and values – and determine that conservatives were the stupid ones.
You know, it’s funny. I just finished pointing out to Shot From Guns in another thread that it’s usually the posters who are so fond of continually calling their opponents stupid and retarded who most often come off as stupid and retarded themselves, and now here I am having to point out the same thing to you. Must be a compensation thing.
Now that you mention it, you do pretty much the same thing.
I would be happy to dissect a piece of formal economic literature with you any time. I confess to being extremely curious which canonical articles in the past fifteen years or so have given you such confidence in your own beliefs. In my own surveys of the literature and struggles with problem sets, I see no such certainty.
I hope you have access to JSTOR. Better yet, if you have some nonbillable hours to kill, I recommend Persson & Tabellini’s Political Economics: Understanding Economic Policy. Section II is all about redistributive politics. As long as you remember your algebra, calculus, probability, and median voter equilibrium theory, you should be fine.
