Category Archives: Media Criticism

Static Scoring Of Health-Care Costs

Yuval Levin notes that CBO is admitting that their projections are intrinsically wrong:

What we have here, in other words, is a frank admission by CBO that their methodology ignores the effects of policy changes on the behavior of both providers and consumers—effects which must, of course, be essential to the consequences of any health-care reform.

This methodological “gap” strongly favors the left in the health-care debate, because it assumes that the economics of health care are just a matter of manipulating levels of spending, and so that crude price controls will not affect access and quality and that market competition will not reduce costs. There is, of course, ample evidence of the former effect (especially in Medicaid, which in most states pays doctors at even lower rates than Medicare, at least for now), and there is some evidence of the latter too (though market forces haven’t had much of a chance to be tried, except in the Medicare prescription-drug benefit; other experiments (like Medicare advantage) all take place in the shadow of the existing fee-for-service Medicare system and so can’t really change the behavior of providers—they therefore have neither traditional Medicare’s ability to boss doctors around nor a market system’s ability to keep costs down, so they end costing no less than traditional Medicare, and sometimes even a little more.)

It’s the same kind of scam that they pull when they statically score the effect of a change in tax rates. It’s lunacy to assume that it will have no effect on behavior, and yet they do, and so delude themselves that they can predict with any confidence the resulting revenue.

“I Didn’t Create A Single Job”

At last, a presidential candidate who understand economics and the limits of government power:

“Don’t get me wrong,” Johnson said in a statement. “We are proud of this distinction. We had a 11.6 percent job growth that occurred during our two terms in office. But the headlines that accompanied that report – referring to governors, including me, as ‘job creators’ – were just wrong.”

“The fact is, I can unequivocally say that I did not create a single job while I was governor,” Johnson added. Instead, “we kept government in check, the budget balanced, and the path to growth clear of unnecessary regulatory obstacles.”

And the current gang in DC is doing exactly the opposite, so there’s no reason that continuing bad economic news should be “unexpected.”

[Update a couple minutes later]

The one stimulus that the government refuses to try:

It’s almost as if Washington envisions the economy not as a complex network of billions of voluntary, mutually beneficial relationships, but as a lawn mower which could be forced to run smoothly if only they’d yank hard enough on the starter cord.

Amid government’s rush to “do something,” we forget that, on a percentage basis, the nation’s most productive years, those in which the U.S. overtook Great Britain to become the world’s leading economic power, occurred prior to the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. What many lawmakers and regulators are not considering here is the strong possibility that the stimulus and intervention have had a deleterious effect.

No, that couldn’t possibly be.

Elena Bonner

Jay Nordlinger remembers:

Last summer, Bonner reflected, “I can say that many of Chazov’s Western colleagues [in the anti-nuclear organization] were wonderful people and high professionals. But they, I think, understand nothing of the essence of socialism-totalitarianism, and were very easily deceived by the organization’s name.”

She continued, “Millions of people today are deceived just as easily, believing in the slogan of the Middle East ‘Quartet,’ ‘Two states for two peoples.’ And I’m afraid that they will realize their mistake only after it becomes impossible to save the State of Israel without a third world war. It will be like Munich. You remember what Chamberlain said: ‘I have brought you peace.’ And the Second World War began!”

In Bonner’s view, the Nobel peace prize had “been devalued.”

No kidding. And sadly for freedom, the world remains full of useful idiots.

A Victory For Free Speech

In the Netherlands:

The presiding judge said Wilders’ remarks were sometimes “hurtful,” “shocking” or “offensive,” but that they were made in the context of a public debate about Muslim integration and multi-culturalism, and therefore not a criminal act.

“I am extremely pleased and happy,” Wilders told reporters after the ruling. “This is not so much a win for myself, but a victory for freedom of speech. Fortunately you can criticize Islam and not be gagged in public debate.”

Meanwhile, back in the supposed land of the free and home of the brave, Yale has decided that criticism of some anti-semitism is off limits:

An antisemitism program needs scholars who deal with Qassam rockets, Grad rockets, and other rocket systems, not snowballs. Scholars who deal with satellite systems, and firebombs targeting Israeli civilians and tanks. Who study soldiers of Hamas, Hezbollah, and other antisemitic terror groups. It needs scholars who deal with Islamist thinkers, from Hasan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb to Mohammad Chatami, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s anti-Israel and pro-suicide-bombing fatwas.

It needs scholars who deal with the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamism — not only in Egypt, but in the entire Middle East, Europe, North America, and elsewhere. It needs scholars on Iran and the analysis of incitement to genocide.

It needs scholars on Turkey, lawful Islamism, and its relationship to anti-Zionism and antisemitism.

It needs scholars on Islamic jihad, terror, the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and homegrown terrorism in the West.

It needs scholars on left-wing, progressive, Muslim, and Neo-Nazi anti-Zionist antisemitism, and the ideologies and concepts of postorientalism, postcolonialism, and their possible relationship to antisemitism (e.g., in the work of Edward Said). And it needs scholars on antisemitism and anti-Israel propaganda in Western mass media in the 21st century.

There is nothing wrong with scholarship on France and Jewish history; it is important. But it shouldn’t be seen as a replacement for serious scholarship on contemporary antisemitism. The study of dead antisemites and past campaigns of vilification is already part of every single Jewish Studies department in the world. And dealing with Jewish literature (the topic of Samuels’ new book in 2010) has nothing to do with research on (contemporary) antisemitism.

Unfortunately, any serious anti-Semitism program at Yale would probably end up indicting much of the faculty there, which is probably why it was shut down to be replaced with the more anodyne one.

[Update a few minutes later]

More thoughts from Mark Steyn:

Nevertheless, as in all these cases, the process is the punishment. The intent is to make it more and more difficult for apostates of the multiculti state to broaden the terms of political discourse. Very few Europeans would have had the stomach to go through what Wilders did — and the British Government’s refusal to permit a Dutch Member of Parliament to land at Heathrow testifies to how easily the craven squishes of the broader political culture fall into line.

And at the end the awkward fact remains: Geert Wilders lives under 24-hour armed guard because of explicit death threats made against him by the killer of Theo van Gogh and by other Muslims. Yet he’s the one who gets puts on trial.

As he says, it’s shameful.

Unexpectedly!

A compilation of headlines. What’s amazing to me is that none of them were in any way unexpected to me, because I’ve recognized the high level of economic nincompoopery at the highest levels of government for years. It’s a shame our intellectual betters (just ask them) in the media can’t figure it out.

[Update a while later]

Gee, I guess I’m smarter than the head of the Fed, too:

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke told reporters Wednesday that the central bank had been caught off guard by recent signs of deterioration in the economy. And he said the troubles could continue into next year.

“We don’t have a precise read on why this slower pace of growth is persisting,” Bernanke said. He said the weak housing market and problems in the banking system might be “more persistent than we thought.”

You don’t say.

[Update a few minutes later]

Hard to argue with this:

As an economist, if I were working for a foreign government and were to design a package of policies to destroy a country’s economy, I would design a plan very similar to what we’ve undertaken in the U.S. over the past 18 months.

If we pursue another economic stimulus of similar size to the previous one, we may as well condemn the economy to another 10-20 years of recession.

Not only will it not work, but it will significantly add to an already grave debt problem. Stimulus is what keeps entrepreneurs from creating new jobs and products. It makes them nervous, because we have to raise taxes in the future to pay for stimulus spending, and this makes for a very uncertain business environment.

You could make a similar statement about space policy. As the preface to the book I’ve been working on for a while begins: “Imagine that extraterrestrial aliens had secretly contacted the White House and U.S. Congress after the Apollo landings, and told them under dire threat that humans were to never again venture beyond low earth orbit, but that the public was not to know this, and to make sure that their successors were aware as well. If it were the case, how would space policy have been much different for the past four decades?”

[Update a few minutes later]

More thoughts from VDH:

Two thoughts: One, the latest Democratic idea of borrowing even more money is de facto proof that all the bailouts, borrowing, vast increases in unemployment and food-stamp monies, Obamacare, etc., have done nothing but terrify employers, who are holding off buying and hiring. And, second, when one adds in the National Labor Relations Board roguery, the presidential quips about the wealthy, the Chrysler creditor mess, the nonstop spread-the-wealth, already-made-enough-money demonization of those who make over $200,000, etc., we are witnessing a sort of psychological stasis in which millions of employers are shrugging and collectively sighing, “I think I’ll pass until this crazy outfit is out of here.”

It can’t happen soon enough.

Is Barack Obama A Bad Man?

This guy thinks so:

Bad people come to us as sweetness and light, charming, intelligent, confident, and often successful. But, they are chameleons who will say whatever is necessary in order to get what they want and do what they may. No truth. No empathy. No soul. Shape-shifting through life they reinvent themselves to suit their audience so as to be everything to everyone. Inside, they are soulless. Alone. Scared. Afraid of being found out and exposed as a fraud. Their fragile self-image hides behind a facade of confidence, humor, and “I’m above it all.” Hence, they appear arrogant, haughty, and cannot bear scorn or reproach.

Barack Obama is one of these bad people. He’s dishonest, narcissistic, and pinning him down can be like nailing jello to the wall. He’s all things to all people, but he is no one — an empty vessel. He uses people and then disposes of them when it’s expedient. His grandmother, his spiritual mentor, anyone who becomes an inconvenience is thrown under the now infamous bus. He is adept at mockery and ridicule. His arrogance is legendary. His skin is decidedly thin and he cannot bear to be contradicted or challenged. He works, not for the American People but, for himself.

He’s a lot like Bill Clinton in that regard, though people tell me the latter is very charismatic in person. It certainly doesn’t come across to me on television.

Space Alien Invasions And Hollywood

Ruminations from Lileks:

if you’re going to cross vast distances to conquer humanity for the usual reasons, I doubt they would use guns and bombs. An EMP for starters, then gas. But it’s never gas. No, they walk around with guns and shoot, and in the case of “Fallen Skies,” they have stormtrooper aim half the time. In last night’s episode the aliens set a trap in a food warehouse, where they suspected the humans might go. Let’s imagine that conversation in the war room:

“Corporal Xxrtg, send a Mechabot 3bV to the trap, and wait for the humans to come for food.”

“Okay, but -”

“But what?”

“If they’re coming for food, they’re probably attached to a larger group. Why not just call in their appearance, and have the huntercraft look for their heat signature and vaporize them all at once?”

“Don’t ask me. Ask Commander Plrgb. It’s his call.”

“As long as we’re at it, why not just send in hush-snakes with the gas? They’d -”

“Again with the gas! It’s always the gas with you.”

“It’s just easier, that’s all I’m saying. Have you seen the reports? We have a 37% kill ratio because someone upstairs says we have to shoot them one at a time. And forget about the wide-radius heat ray, apparently.”

“I don’t make the rules of engagement. Now get on it.”

“Sure. And tell whoever assigned us the Mechabot 3bV that the men call it Old Stompy. It can’t take two steps without giving away its position.”

“Get moving.”

“Yes sir.”

There are two ways the series can end: humans win, or humans lose. “Win” is nice, rah us, but I have a hard time believing that the time-honored Ragtag Band of Scrappy Fighters can defeat a culture capable of space travel. It even makes “War of the Worlds” seem silly, because you have to imagine this conversation at HQ: did you remind the contractors to refit the ships with biofilters?”

(Panicked expression) “I thought that was your job.”

“Hell no. I TOLD you.”

“No you didn’t.”

Remind me to hire him for my next SF flick (which will also be my first).

[Update a while later]

This seems related, somehow: s3x with creatures from the future can be bad for your offspring’s health.