Fixing it later

An open Letter to Ms. Gail Collins:

I only have one thought

Obviously. Yes, muirgeo, what is thy bidding?

which is that the Democrats should pass the health care bill now.


Ok, Ms. Dumb, what, perchance leads you to that conclusion? Perhaps the fact that no one likes your agenda, once presented in full view? Possibly the nasty unintended consequences thereof, on implementation?

Ms. Collins, may I call you Fail? Fail Collins, what, precisely in your extremely limited and uninformed worldview, makes you think that you somehow have dominion over other people and how they choose to seek medical treatment for themselves, in some fantasy quasi-legislative framework that you magically control?

Who or what gives you the right to determine that for others, about whom you know nothing? And which population do you purport to represent? Seems like Massachusetts, who tried that already, doesn't like that too much (see Tuesday, Ms. Dumb).

What the hell, precisely, are you talking about, you clueless fool?

Signed,
Not much of a cheese shop is it, really?

"It’s really hard to get rid of bad legislation. Most people (almost everybody?) think ethanol subsidies are a loser except for the people who get rich from them directly, Archer Daniels Midland and maybe some others. But do we fix it? We don’t. That’s the way the system works. There’s a lot of inertia. It’s hard to get health care changed. And once it’s changed it’s hard to change it back."

This, sort of, makes sense to me. I think the founding fathers got it right.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

Unfortunately, the new breed is inclined to see change as progress, whatever the cause.

The court gets it, they're properly reluctant to revisit recent decisions. I would argue, a little too reluctant. The legislature, on the other hand, is almost paralyzed if they recognize the status quo. They see jobs, and modification (read: expansion, i.e., change) is the only option.

As the cool and deliberate sense of the community ought, in all governments, and actually will, in all free governments, ultimately prevail over the views of its rulers; so there are particular moments in public affairs when the people, stimulated by some irregular passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be the most ready to lament and condemn. In these critical moments, how salutary will be the interference of some temperate and respectable body of citizens, in order to check the misguided career, and to suspend the blow meditated by the people against themselves, until reason, justice, and truth can regain their authority over the public mind? What bitter anguish would not the people of Athens have often escaped if their government had contained so provident a safeguard against the tyranny of their own passions? Popular liberty might then have escaped the indelible reproach of decreeing to the same citizens the hemlock on one day and statues on the next.


The Federalist No. 63

When politicians "fix" things, you write that as "make things worse" with a fair certainty that you'll be right.

Name your metrics and name your wager. I'll give you odds, and cover them.

Absolute certainty.

Remember this:

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/01/another-dow...

It connects starvation in Haiti with corn ethanol subsidies.

Why look at ethanol subsidies? Look at our current medicaid and medicare programs, which are horribly flawed and yet there is no initiative to fix them (except by passing an even larger health care program). Or, look how well efforts went to "fix" social security.

Look at our current medicaid and medicare programs, which are horribly flawed and yet there is no initiative to fix them .

Good point, we do need better methods to go back and re-assess the end result of our policies, Republican or Democrat, and adjust them periodically.

You just might be too young for me to ask this question of; but can you tell me one moment, just one teeny fraction of a moment that medicare and medicaid were not horribly flawed? They were flawed in concept, they were flawed in creation, and they were flawed in implementation, and they remain flawed in administration.

If they are broken like that, just exactly what do you suggest be done to "fix" them?

Social security was conceived as a lie, created as a lie, promoted as a lie, sold as a lie, imposed as a lie, and is administered as a lie, along with the income tax it reigns equally as the top echelon lies of all times. How do you suggest congress "fix" social security without people learning how they have been lied to?

Vidyohs,

I'm not sure what you're driving at. Where did I suggest that medicare and medicaid were not flawed to begin with? I think you missed my point, which was in support of the post.

Simple point, I thought I was plain. It was just an intellectual exercise I was asking you to perform.

"Look at our current medicaid and medicare programs, which are horribly flawed and yet there is no initiative to fix them" (your words)

How do you fix something when it was created broken?

Just as an aid to thought, I fix my lawntractor when it is broken because I know it was in a working condition and that I can restore it to working condition, and I know that it was designed to function flawlessly.

Government programs are broken coming off the showroom floor, we all know they are broken and unworkable.

So is the intelligent question one about fixing or about scrapping it, or even perhaps being smart enough not to buy into it in the first place?

Vidyohs,

Right. I think you are making too much of my comment.

You're convenient, get used to being used at times. I'll soften that...........:-).

My bet is that she couldn't care less if it's fixed later.

The point is to entrench government by adding another huge piece of the GDP to the things it controls.

So it is a matter of whther it is more broken now or if it will be more broken after a bad repair.

I have an actual baler and it is held together with actual baling twine and it still makes money.

It would not make money without the baling twine. It would make more money if the insuror hadn't declared it to have pre-existing condition, after the warranty ran out.

So I fix it badly, and I'll ix it again later when it is really broken. what choice have I got? It is either that or a dead baler, and the price of a new baler goes up every day. So does the price of repairs.

I choose the lesser of two evils, that being my only option since it is all I can get/afford.

Then of course there are the Republicans standing shoulder to shoulder like riot police. I used to think they were my neighbors.

Your logic escapes me.

"hen of course there are the Republicans standing shoulder to shoulder like riot police. I used to think they were my neighbors."

I am sorry, sir, but that little sentence tells me something I will share back with you.

Thinking that way tells me you never had neighbors at all, to you they were resources, like your baler, like your milk cow, like the dirt of your farm.

You would have neighbors if you recognized their right to do with their resources what they wished, and not feel as if they should be made to share with you or fix your problems.

People like you scare me.

The Republcans have stood shoulder to shoulder to prevent even a partial repair. I believe it was a stupid position for them to take, but it will be a few decades efore we see the truth of it. We need a better insurance plan,and we need a better health care system.

I paid health insurance premims for 35 years, and the first time I got sick the company refused to pay and cancelled my policy. Where is the insurance in that plan? If the republicans think that is OK, they are no longer my friends, unless they offer up a better plan, which they have not. They can count me as a former Republican.

To be fair, the two halfway useful suggestion sRepublicans have made wer e not picked up y the Democrats, and they should have been. There is no reason we cannot have co-ops with the ability to negotiate insurance deals. I don't think they would amount to much, but maybe someone like Farm Bureau could collectivize purchase of insurance for farmers like me. otherwise it is simply not available.

It is a strange situation to see Republicans offering a plan for collectiization and th eDemocrats ignoring it. Likewise for the Republican plan to turn insurance in to interstate commerce and get it out of the bailiwick of "control" by multiple state. Kind of an odd position for the party that is usually pro-states rights, and again the Democrats ignored them.

Oh, and you are wrong about my neighbors, it is they that have moved in around me and now wish to tell me what I can and cannot do with my resources.

Our health care and insurance costs WILL go up. The only question is how do we get the most service for the least cost. We know for a fact the present system isn't doing it because other locations get as good or better care for less cost.

The Republicans have not shown me what their plan (no plan) will cost. Absent that information, the fact that the OTHER plan will cost more than the present plan tells me exactly nothing.

Here is an excellent suggestion, stop blaming others and do a better job of choosing your insurance company, your baler, your neighbors, etc.

In 1954, when I was 13 I was beam walking a 2X4 connecting two fence posts of a barbed wire fence. The 2X4 broke, I fell and a barb gouged a deep wound in the web between two of my fingers.

I was about six blocks from where my dad ran his meat market. I went to him there, and he sent me to a local doctor. The doctor gave me a shot of novacaine, cleaned the wound and put in 4 stitches to close the wound.

Total cost, $15 cash money. Free market transaction. No paper work, except the receipt the doctor's nurse gave me.

If you want something, why not that system? I suggest you'd do better, much better.

It's your baler, do you expect your neighbor to pay for its repair?

When politicians "fix" things, who pays for it?

Imagine of congress designed your baler.

Then there's the question of why you can't afford to fix it properly or replace it.
How much have you paid in taxes?
Any idea how much more things cost because of government?

The logic escapes you because you are unfamiliar with the premises.

The point is that the baler works better with a partial repair than no repair.

When I fix things, who pays for it? The customer.

If congress designed my baler it would be more expensive, and safer, and have a longer warranty.

"Any idea how much more things cost because of government?"
Obviously you do not. Costs are not only government costs, or government imposed costs. While it does not always happen, it is possible for a government policy to save more than it costs.

The logic escapes me because it is illogical to leave something broken rather than make a partial repair.

But why pass something that's broken in the first place?

Tell me a government policy the saves money on net.

It is easy to talk about fixing things, you have incentive to make your baler work to your satisfaction. The incentives facing congress are entirely different than those you face regarding your baler.

If congress designed my baler it would be more expensive, and safer, and have a longer warranty.

A specious assertion. Congress is full of people who got elected by making promises to voters that they can't keep. I ran for congress when Nancy Pelosi got elected, she promised divergent groups that she was on their side, even when the groups themselves had conflicting interests. They do pay off those that helped them get elected.

Let's sift out the essence, Sam.

The logic escapes him because he is illogical.

Russ is absolutely right. That's exactly how the system works. Thus, the problem is the system - democracy is the problem.

Gail Collins is another example of why I am coming to fear my fellow human more than even the run-amok government.

What's disturbing is the way politics is played like a team sport. She wants her team to score a goal no matter what the consequences are for millions of people. The effects are unimportant. The political win is all important.

BTW, Russ, we saw your recent guest appearance on Stossel and thought that you did an especially good job in the segment. Very clear, very understandable to everyone. Hopefully, we'll see more of you on his show.

I'd swear that Stossel (and Beck) are following this blog.

I've noticed that Stossel and Don link to each other quite often. Nothing makes me happier given the respect I have for both of them.

For some people winning is more important than being right.

Fixing laws requires admitting that they were not done right the first time, which requires admitting to error.
I can't recall a politician admitting to error.
Ever.