On Outrage and Annoyance: Twisting a Thought Pretzel

There's been a number of them lately; the ones that just scream at you from their titles alone. Here we have "Fair Pay" which is, amazingly, properly capitalized. Way to go, hardworker! I know that shift key has been giving her trouble since she became dimly aware of the English language. It's good to see she's making progress.

Speaking of hard work:

One of the dividing lines between me and a lot of the commentators on the Wall Street crisis is that I am not outraged by their pay. If any of my classmates are left on the Street, I'm well aware that they mortgaged their last ten years in order to bet on a directorship that's now at best a badly tainted prize, and at worst just evaporated beneath their fingers. I work 60 to 80 hour weeks doing something I love. They've been working 30-50 hours a week more than that, doing work that no reasonable human being could claim to enjoy the mechanics of. I do not resent the difference between their well-located New York co-ops and my tiny row house in an "emerging" neighborhood in DC. I'm only thankful I'm the one in the row house.

The avalanche of stupidity comes quickly these days. Seems like every post I take a look at has an opening paragraph so choc full o' crap I can smell it through the screen. Rundown time:

1) She's not outraged that people are taking millions of tax payer money because they completely fucked up after having already collected millions while in the process of fucking up? Yet she complains about the horrors of welfare and food stamps as if we should allow people to starve to death so that they don't get soft. Huh, interesting point of view.

2)Hm, herself and her classmates mortgaged "ten years" (that's a long time to get a fucking MBA) to get to the point of wreaking havoc on our economy. Yeah, that's swell. I personally have lots of respect for those who think of education as "mortgaging" their time. I know that when I finish my PhD, if I'm not making 100k right off the block I'm going to rue all of that damn time I spent "educating" myself. Seriously, who the fuck demands sympathy for choosing a job they're essentially admitting is complete bullshit? These people "mortgaged" their time because they wanted to be, and felt entitled to be, masters of the fucking universe. I suppose we should laud Stalin the many hours he put in trying to kill all these people. I mean, c'mon guys, look how fucking hard he worked?

3) She works 60-80 hours a week? Put that one in the "claims unsubstantiated by evidence" file.

4) Again, not sure why we're supposed to feel so bad about people who work really hard doing something of use to no one just because they work hard.

So she quotes someone who makes a point that these people are pretty much brainwashed. It's a fair point. I'm not sure why Megan brings it up, though, because her next libergraph introduces itself with:

The difference between me and them is that I don't think they deserve their pay, either. Now it may be that I, in my position as taxpayer, have to continue to pay these guys their huge salaries, because the unintended consequences of trying to regulate their pay will make it harder to get the banking system back on its feet.

Oh, so people are getting undeservedly rich while billions starve, but that's not outrageous. Again, point taken, McArdle. Glad that she's willing to take one for the team by paying them with her taxes. We wouldn't want to destroy the fabulous banking system. I mean, it's been keeping us out of depressions for decades at a time at only the cost of a few S&L type scandals in between. That's only a major scandal/screw up every 10-20 years! It's a fucking peachy keen organization that one is, the banking system. Gotta pay to keep it healthy! Fuck getting people to the doctors. I want my tax money going to the banking system!

I don't know how much more of this I can actually address directly. She futilely tries to pump her argument but somehow manages to start talking about herself again. Guess who's not at all outraged by their inability to get a job in 2002 after getting their MBA. Not Megan, that's who. After picking out the narcissism, her argument is almost a thing of beauty. She's essentially saying that the rules are totally arbitrary and no one is entitled to anything. Yet, this is the system for which all attempts at correction are misguided government coercion. Unless of course it's the banking system which needs a bailout in which case open up Treasury's coffers, already! Can't you see the investment bankers are behind on their boat payments? I love libertarians. "Life sucks but I got mine. Whatcha gonna do? PS The other people who got theirs are gods!"

Towards the end, she clarifies a point on her outrage (Only 20 million paragraphs into another one of her "Me me me" screeds).

So for all the bankers annoy me, their pay--and its difference from mine--doesn't outrage me. The difference between their pay and that of a physical therapy assistant or an auto line worker doesn't outrage me.

Ohhhhh. It's just annoying. Yeah, I see. The exploitation of the productive members of society by the members who merely push paper around is a mere annoyance. Silly me. Once I realize that the people whose time was spent in the pursuit of money at the expense of life, relationships, and any sense of having made a meaningful contribution have made sacrifices for their money, suddenly I don't see them in such a low light. If they love money so much they're willing to sacrifice their fucking soul for it, well, hey, I guess they deserve it, right? Oh wait, then she says "No one deserves their pay so I can hardly be angry at blah blah taking what they can get." so they don't deserve it. And if we're angry it's not because there's a shitfest of a system that needs to be fixed. We're just jealous. Or something, I dunno. The mobious strip that is this woman's thoughts is far too twisted in on itself for me to follow.

She closes with some bullshit about how she's not angry at anyone, which is completely congruent with her constant backing of those with whom she identifies while she tears down those with whom she does not. The reason she didn't frame her whole spiel from the POV of the autoworkers? Coincidence, I'm sure.

Damned if You Do, Damned if You Don't

There has been an historic event over at The Atlantic. Our "Eloise at The Atlantic" (as Roy Edroso puts it. I've never read Eloise but apparently it's very clever.)- well, it's truly astonishing - I... I... I'm getting choked up here.... she... she... she properly capitalized a title.. There's even grammar and shit in that thing. "Preach it, Brother Sanchez"... the phrase has just become the prettiest on record. Why, our muse,after years of badgering, may have finally listened to a critic. Could such a thing have happened? If so, I think we can likely head over to, uh..., somewhere in Europe and tell them not to bother powering the LHC back up. The Standard Model has been proved. The world is in harmony. We an all sleep at night, safe and sound, comfortable in the knowledge that terrorism has been defeated and that the economy is back on the up and up. Hold your breath, people. It might just be the greatest time to be alive.

While we can rest comfortably in the knowledge that the writers of the day are taking the 5 seconds necessary to make sure their articles are properly introduced, there's still work to be done. Though our pupil's post may have finally been begun in a competent manner, that which follows still reeks of hackdom, shallowness, and bias. I give you the "I know you are but what am I argument":

Julian points out that authoritarianism isn't some exclusively Republican vice:

Failing to funnel billions to a failing business is a form of authoritarian punishment. As an alternative, we're offered the proposition that we "want affordable, safe, fuel-efficient, environmentally sound cars built by committed workers who are rewarded for undertaking this task on our behalf." I think it's a lot more revealing to contemplate the sort of mindset that insists on seeing every economic outcome as a political "reward" or "punishment."

This whole familial frame seems to amount to an inverted Gospel of Wealth: Where the 19th century claimed that financial success was a reflection of moral worth, the function of public policy in the 21st century will be to create that symmetry. The only question is whether workers in a particular industry are naughty children who need to be sent to the corner for a time-out, or well-behaved children who should get a gold sticker for effort. This is, as I hope goes without saying, a pretty authoritarian frame on either side. It also seems like a manifestly awful way to make economic policy choices. Barring some marvelous Lebnizian coincidence, the answers to questions about the moral desert of workers in particular sectors are unlikely to consistently match the answers to quesitons about what's in the long-term interest of the economy as a whole.

Julian incredulously asks how failing to give away billions is a sign of ideology. That's a fair point, if not for the fact that Republican's were busy gleefully rejoicing that the auto-bailout gave them a chance to "take their first shot against organized labor." If there's anything that screams well reasoned consideration, it's failing to back a bill intended to aid the economy during the worst blah since blah because you have a chance to stick it to those pesky blue collar workers and their whole "treat us fairly" bullshit. But, I digress.

Apparently, the fact that Congress is making sure the money is being spent on something reasonable rather than keeping a failing business alive to continue to fail is a evidence of "mindset that insists on seeing every economic outcome as a political 'reward' or 'punishment.'" (YEAH SCARE-QUOTES!) It's not like when we wrote a blank check for the financial industry they didn't just blow it on expensive spas in California or use it to buy up other companies rather than lend it to people like we wanted.

Yes sir, either you agree with ole' Jules about how, as usual, the government should stay away or you're an authoritarian. Also, if you tell Jules that blindly following the same rules in all situations is, at least, dogmatism and almost certainly authoritarianism, then he's rubber and you're glue.

Evil Minds Think Alike

Great minds think alike

It occurred to me, while I was listening to the congressional hearings, that the government could stop most of this by just seizing houses in default and continuing to make the mortgage payments. It turns out someone else is thinking the same way:

Yes, what a great mind. Give the banks lots of money and fuck over your average Joe who just wanted a fucking house to live in. Oh, wait she thought of that problem.

There are inherent issues here: at what rate do we rent to the current occupants? How do we make the banks pay for their folly? Also, the government is not a notoriously effective landlord. On the other hand, it punishes the homeowners without putting them on the street, and eventually the houses will be worth something.

Well, I said she thought of it. It's not like I said she actually gave a fuck about it.

Punish the homeowner, but save the bank. John Smith's right hand surely knows not what his left hand does.

Those Damn Empires

Megan's piped up a few times now about the conflict in Georgia. Cleverly, she's referenced the same song in the titles of two of her posts. Seriously, she's not even phoning it in anymore. She's smoke signaling it in.

There's a smattering of stupid in all around, but the main underlying idiocy and bias is her deeply furrowed brow over those pesky pinkos (uh.. shit, what color are they now? Whatever, they'll always be commies!!!!!!!!) trying to rebuild their empire.

So let's compare and contrast a couple of conflicts and Megan's views on them.

If a country wants to invade another country thousands of miles away, that has no shared ethnic or cultural background, has made no direct threats in decades, and coincidentally contains large amounts of a very precious resource, invading it is ok. That's not empire building. That's just fighting the good fight

On the flip side, if a country that borders you -and contains two regions cultural and ethnically similar to you that have declared autonomy and indicated a strong willingness to become a part of your country- sends their army into one of said disputed regions, well, you're just a damn power hungry lunatic for thinking that you can send troops there yourself! How dare those Russians try to force those South Ossetians and Abkhazians to join the country that they want to be a part of! Where will they stop? HAVE THEY NO SENSE OF DECENCY?!?!?!?

I guess, then, that Megan would be OK with Russia invading Mexico or something.

Now, before someone points out that I don't know what I'm talking about, let me admit that I may not know what I'm talking about vis-a-vis the Russia-Georgia conflict (Though, from what little I've read, no one knows what the hell is going on in the Caucasus). Furthermore, I'm not entirely sure that Russia hasn't done a number of things wrong during this conflict. However, Megan's accusations that Russia is attempting to rebuild its empire is based on a combination of jack and shit. I got curious about the situation and actually read a couple of articles, almost all of which indicated that South Ossetia and Abkhazia would both love nothing more than to be absorbed by Russia and at the very least want nothing to do with Georgia. So, once again, Megan doesn't know what the fuck she's talking about.

Shocking, ain't it?

For a bonus kicker, she expresses dismay that America should ZOMG DO SOMETHING BEFORE THE RUSSIANS ARE KNOCKING DOWN OUR DOORS AGAIN!!!! About what exactly should be done, she remains unsurprisingly silent. Blind ideology is her thing, not actual solutions to problems.

I think I have an idea, though. It involves our armed forces. Guess what it is? That's right; let's start another war! YIPPEE! It's been a while since we killed us some Ruskies! Nothing says "doing something" like an F-16! Hoooo doggie!

Chavez is so very very very bad!

Megan has had it up to HERE with corrupt rulers going against the will of the people, which is why she's so mad at congress and Bush Hugo Chavez right now!

After his proposed constitutional reforms were rejected by voters, Chavez seems set to go ahead and enact them anyway by decree:

<snip>

One might have asked why Chavez needs emergency decree powers during an oil boom when his country is at peace. Just askin' . . .

One might never ask such a thing about an American president, though.

Remember, peace is war. Recession is prosperity ZOMG BAD!!!!! PROSPERITY!!! Stupid is intelligent.

Obviously, the only solution is to invade Venezuala to liberate those oil wells people from that horrible democratically elected president dictator.

WARNING! DANGER!

The authorities at Fire Megan McArdle would like to pass on the following public service announcement:

Beware of blog posts that fraudulently claim to offer you a "Morning Smile"

Several unsuspecting Americans have contacted the FMM authorities to report one Megan McArdle (who is not an employee of Fire Megan McArdle, despite persistent rumors to the contrary) is posting videos on her blog "Asymmetrical Information" under the above mentioned heading. We believe her plan is to attempt to get readers to view the video embedded into said blog post thinking that they would be viewing something entertaining. The truth is, the video contains a disturbingly unfunny clip of a man (or possible women, FMM has been unable to verify) pretending to cry in distress about the attacks ads recently posted by the McCain campaign against Barack Obama.

We warn you that said clip is nauseating and not at all clever. Some claim that this is evidence of McArdle's completely skewed sense of humor (a phenomenon that has been thoroughly document by FMM before) but there is a second opinion held by respected FMM authorities. High ranking members of FMM fear something more nefarious is at foot.

Said authorities believe that McArdle's post is an attempt to weaken potential readers of her blog. Her idea may be to intentionally present something stupid and annoying that is not her own work at the start of the day. This tactic is designed to leave readers of her later blog posts inured to stupid and annoying ideas. Such inoculation to idiocy and cruelty is designed to make McArdle's own moronic and evil ideas look intelligent and benevolent by comparison.

FMM has assembled a full investigative team to look into this issue. Until a conclusion can be reached we highly recommend that McArdle's blog be avoided at all costs. If it cannot be avoided, we warn you NOT TO CLICK any embedded video or to read anything that McArdle calls funny, says will make you smile, or otherwise endorses in the name of entertainment.

Your brain may be at stake. Reading such poorly thought-out and inhumane posts as those provide by McArdle is not recommended for most people. FMM are trained professionals hand selected for their ability to resist dumb and self-centered ideas. Do not attempt at home!

Sincerely,

NutellaonToast

Director of Long Winded Curse Filled Vitriolic Rants
Fire Megan McArdle Inc.