In Which Something Is Admitted

Ms. McArdle is worried. But not that worried.

I think this is a worry that we should take seriously.  But here are some reasons you might not worry so much:

Then:

Update:  Apparently, I heard wrong, and it starts in 2011.  That's infinitely more worrying, though caveats one and two still apply.

Here, alas, we must start wondering what words mean. Did Mlle. hear it, or read it? She provides a link, so she must have read something, maybe. Yet she "heard wrong." It is a mystery.

Shorter Partisan Detective

Shorter "ACORN Story Gets Curiouser and Curiouser:"

If I'm deliberately obtuse, I can make it look like all of ACORN is a killing puppies for profit and using the money to abort Republican babies. Also, my titles are absolute fucking nonsense.

Piling On The Pile

Not actually to contribute anything, but to note that many others seem to have caught Fire Megan McArdle fever:

The major problem with this excerpt, however, is that there are so many large claims in such a short paragraph. I see six relatively strong statements here, and none of them are backed up with the least bit of evidence.

Yes, Megan is the excerpt under discussion.

Is There a Dumbass in the House?

Megan picks the weirdest things to opine about. I'm not sure if she's trying to be edgy or if there is some secret personal reason for each of the topics she espouses on, but the only unifying thing I can find is that she's stupid on all of them.

Perhaps her recent foray into best medical practice is motivated by her multitude of chronic aliments. Whatever the cause, we can say for sure that Megan knows better.

She starts with a long excerpt of someone else's writing. The veterans will not need to be notified that it is quite a bit longer than her own musings, though no less well informed.

And so, NICE has decided, on the basis of "the evidence", that acupuncture and chiropractic are a good way to spend the NHS's money.
(...)
As Edzard Ernst points out, the Cochrane Institute (the other great temple of evidence-based medicine) actually found chiropractic to be more or less useless, while the evidence for acupuncture is that all of the ancient wisdom and theory of the meridians and qi doesn't actually confer any great benefit over and above that which can be gained from simply lying on a table and being poked with sticks.

I see. So one investigative body says that chiropractors and acupuncture work, and another does not. Naturally, since those two things aren't "modern medicine" this is proof that the skeptics are right. Also, the fact that both report that acupuncture works is central to his point. The real problem here is the acupuncture works even if you're doing it differently than is commonly done, proving that acupuncture doesn't work and is total bullshit.

The rest of the excerpt extols on how medicine is complex and so we can't know anything for sure. This is both insightful and proof that we know for sure that acupuncture and chiropractors are crocks.

Now we get to Megan.

This is part of a broader problem with medicine and other sciences with physics envy. Medicine, like economics, is really messy. You can't do the same kind of controlled experiments that you can do on rats or quarks, and as a result, the results are often hard to interpret.

Hmm, you can't do experiments in medicine? Wow, those MD-PhD's are gonna be pissed to find out they wasted a decade of their life pursuing the impossible. I Love the analogy to economics, too. We all know that studying individual ailments and studying the complex interactions of millions of people are roughly equivalent. That's why medicine and economics have both come out with so few concrete improvements for our day to day lives.

But this doesn't stop doctors, or policymakers, from acting as if the studies or metastudies can deliver vastly more certainty than is possible from such inherently sloppy science.

Which is why our muse calls herself an economist.

This is why, for example, I am broadly sympathetic to Paul Campos' claim that medical guidelines on obesity tell you much more about the attitudes towards fat in the upper middle class social stratum that doctors occupy, than about reliable scientific evidence on same.

Right, the fact that medicine cannot produce reliable evidence is proved by the fact that medical claims aren't backed by the available evidence. The available evidence which cannot be produced.

But policy demands certainty. And so you get obesity guidelines advising everyone to diet and excercise to shed their excess pounds, even though it's as close to a scientific certainty as anything is that most people simply regain any weight they manage to diet off. And you get absurdly precise economic forecasting, even though in many cases, the better answer would be "who knows?"

It's not that Megan is wrong all the time. It's that no one can ever possibly be right about anything. Oh, and the fact that fat people have a hard time losing weight is apparently proof that being overweight is not detrimental to your health. Also, since most people don't lose weight no one should try, ever. Or something. She has a point. She swears.

In both cases, I don't see a better alternative. But we should be more skeptical of both the institutions, and their claims.

Oh, that explains her constant cheer-leading for the implementation of the things she just attempted to disprove.

Let's Not Get Crazy Here, People!

Yeah! She's talking up affirmative action!

But hey, we all get things we don't deserve. I'll go further: almost all of us get something we don't deserve as a result of our race, including white people. Perhaps even especially white people.

Yes, perhaps. It might be that white people are overwhelmingly represented disproportionately in the ranks of the privileged. Or, maybe black people are just stoopid, too. I dunno. Too hard to tell, really.

If you don't believe it, ask yourself why repeated studies show that resumes with identifiably black names get fewer interview offers than identical white resumes.

Which is why she modifies her statements about racism? Wait, when she says "if you don't believe it" is she implying that she's trying to convince someone that racism exists? Perhaps not.

Sonia Sotomayor is not manifestly unqualified to be a Supreme Court justice, so focusing on affirmative action is completely irrelevant.

But the fact that your cohorts are doing it is only maybe, kind of, and indication that they're racist, short-sighted dicks. Perhaps.

You can argue with her politics or her legal judgement, and hey, I'm all ears.

Liar.

But the affirmative action complaints aren't advancing our quest to find out whether or not she'd be a good justice. They're just alienating the people you want to convince.

Megan, consistent with her uncanny ability to be about one or two years behind the conventional wisdom of even the most stubborn moron, is just now realizing that Republicans have gone insane. Perhaps.

My Sentiments Exactly

Helicopter Ben fires up the engine

Will this work? Damned if I know, and I bet Bernanke doesn't either. It should work, in theory. But while in theory, theory is the same as practice, in practice, they differ. These days, more sharply every day.

Damned if I know. Just how I feel about the whole thing. But I'm not spending all my time pretending I know, or admitting I don't know over & over. I'm starting to think all economic discourse, like Jim Cramer, should be made illegal.

Red In The Face. Literally.

I think one of our many fine commenters may have referenced this in a comment earlier, but you must waste 4 mins. 20 secs. of your life to see Ms. McArdle "pwned," as you goofy-ass kids say.

Wouldn't unemployment stats be to count the number of people unemployed, not some imaginary "misery index?"

Can You Imagine?

Worst sentence ever written in journalism?

The nerve of a typist who has to clarify herself every couple of wks. calling someone else on bad journalism or typing. Or anything else.

This gig is sapping my non-existent soul. At this point I can barely muster outrage.

McArdle Fairness Doctrine Act of 2009

Megan, who recently identified herself as among "center-right and onward people," is all mad about Congreƒs spending the taxpayers' money. Well, she's mad that Democrats are spending the taxpayers' money, because the blockquote she provides is all about a Democratic Congressional Caucus retreat. The item she linked also mentions Republican Congressional retreats (not that you'd know from Megan's selection) which like their funding not from the people they are alleged to represent, but straight from the corporate interests actually represented by the Greedy Old Party.

You know, we gave them a whole building and everything just so they could have a place to plan for the entire country. We also provide them with offices filled with staff people dedicated to planning important things for the entire country. If that's not enough, I suggest they pass the hat and rent a VFW hall somewhere like most of their constituents have to . . . or figure out a way to pay for it without tapping government funds.

Good points. Maybe all corporate retreats should be outlawed. After all, they have "buildings and everything" to work in. Certainly those seminars & conferences to which Megan flies that are financed by non-profits should be halted immediately. That's taxpayer money that the non-profits get by not paying taxes. Enough!

Blessed Relief

I'd give Mighty Megan credit for posting as late as she did yesterday (a Friday) but must offset it w/ the realization it'll be the proverbial light posting next wk., as the crush of consumption crescendos, & we're all re-united w/ family friends.

Fine by me. No vague point, then no counterpoint. No ur-trolling needed. Stay away until mid-January, Ms. McA., then come back & tell us how your mother's retirement fund has been wiped out & she'll be staying w/ you for...Or not. Why wish ill on anyone at this time of festive cheer?


On a personal note, a digital telebision set has been installed in my motel room, so I'll be devoting a lot of time to examining the scores of extra infomercial channels that this modern techno-wonder has brought us, & bringing you a post-holiday (It's not "Christmas," damnit!) sales gift list, a la Megan. (Like hell!)

And if Megan (or anyone else) doesn't cause any more trouble, I may not have to open the laptop & register my displeasure for a while, so, w/ fingers crossed for more off-time, we wish all a cheerful "Bah! Humbug!!" & Solstice Greetings. The days are getting longer.

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.

Uh, Like, Just Typing Off The Top of My Head

Once again, it's the kinda, sorta, like school of opinionating.

Of course, it doesn't look very good for McCain to be upstaged by his VP. On the other hand, there is, I think, a certain subtle confirmation to a cultural role we're comfortable with: the strong husband/wife team. I'm not saying that there is some romantic aspect to their candidacy, but rather that I think there's a way to build on that partnership image that gives her a central role without making McCain look weak. Maybe. I'll have to see how things develop.

Coated in weasel words & "on the other hands."

Which "cultural role" is Mlle. McA. talking about here, if I may ask? Bill & Hill? Nick & Nora Charles? A couple from reality, or a "cultural role" from fiction?

A Sleeping Giant Awakens, Rolls Over, & Returns to Sleep

Sez La Megan:

I think we may be sure that Microsoft was less concerned with the tender feelings of porn consumers (and/or their spouses) and more concerned with striking a blow at Google.

But this has broader applications than Google. Media companies are still trying to figure out how to make web advertising lucrative enough to support a full, print-style application--Politico is a rousing success, and yet makes 60% of its revenue from a cheat sheet it prints for a paltry few tens of thousands of readers. We don't need a new web browser making things even harder than they already are.

Ms. McArdle, have you noticed that Microsoft itself is a media company, & would love to make more (Or some, what the hell do I know?) money from, among other places, MSN.com?Remember a few months or so ago when there was big blather about Microsoft purchasing Yahoo!? So they could get a bigger on-line presence? So I'm not sure why Bill G. & the gang would be trying to cut off their noses to spite their faces, unless this is some sort of "Look, competition is, is...um, like, really good" item. (It's just so hard to understand anything she types.)

And is Ms. McA. opposed to a company providing something that people want to use, for whatever reason, if it might cut into her paycheck? What kind of competition & free market stuff is that? Aren't we all supposed to take risk, & suffer the consequences?

P. S.: Does anyone give a shit about Idiot Exploder 8 anyway? Aren't we all using Firefox 3?

Megastats: 19 lines quoted, 8 lines typed. Add another line for the title if you feel generous.

Even When She's Right, She's Wrong

First, we get hit with disturbing sexual inneundo in her post title "No, really, I'll pull out." I haven't been this permaflaccid since Bob Dole was pimping for Viagra. Seriously, I think my dick just shrank all the way up inside my body cavity.

Megan spends the post explaining that she thinks the possibility of a timetable for withdrawal being set while Bush is still in office is better for McCain than it is for Obama:

I'm puzzled by war opponents who think that voters will suddenly love Obama for having been "right all along". Assuming arguendo that this is true, the psychological logic is off. Most Americans supported the war. Do you become more endeared of your spouse when it turns out that you really should have taken that left fork thirty miles ago? Most people prefer folie à deux.

Unfortunately, she may be right about this. Of course, that doesn't make her any less incompetent.

Rather than feeding the early war proponents the same self-centered bullshit they've been filling up on ever since it became clear how stratospherically wrong they were, she could've pointed out that this isn't the best way to make a decision. How about actually conceding that Barack may have gotten it right because he has better-than-average judgment? Naw, after all, who wants the leader of the free world to be smarter than Dick, John, and Jane? Maybe she might point out that McCain was one of the earliest proponents of the war and his voice, filled with warmongering and lies, was one of the reasons so many Americans were fooled? McCain wanted us to invade Iraq BEFORE Bush started pushing for it, for fuck's sake. Why not point out that, while a lot of us were wrong along with him, he was the first to be wrong. His wrongness was a deciding factor in the wrongness of all those who trusted him to be right!

But, naw, that's too "complex" and the rubes won't get it. Stick to the cynical observations, Megan. It's not like you have a unique position of being a somewhat well listened to voice that might actually sway a few people to realize the folly of voting for the guy who was just as dumb as they were. Just go ahead and encourage them to vote for the guy that steered them wrong in the first place. Carry on, Megs. You're doing God's work.

If You Have A Mind, Please Make It Up

It would make my day, if not the whole wk., if Ms. McArdle could just once state a firm opinion about something, or at least have an idea.

Instead, it's weasel words all the way.

At least we can take comfort in the notion that income inequality is probably falling . . .

"Notion," "probably." She's the Queen of The Qualifiers. And I, for one, have no idea where she gets this notion. Not from anything that she typed or quoted that I read, that's certain.

Do You Have Any Ideas Or...Oh, Just Forget It

Megan weighs in on the latest example of why humanity should be erased from the planet before it really hurts itself.

Except that she didn't say anything new, or do anything but explain the obvious to us. The quote from hilzoy ("Hilzoy views McCain's desire to allow Georgia into NATO as sheer madness:" Mlle. McA. can't even do a link properly. Miss, this is not your own crummy recipe blog for your galpals, it's supposed to be for the admittedly degenerate web presence of a once important & prestigious American magazine. Try to give two shits about it.) by itself would have provided a public service, but Megan's addition is just nothing.

Another way to look at the question is: are we going to allow Russia to reassemble the old Russian empire? At its heart, that's what this is about. Maybe we should; maybe it's none of our business who Russia decides to invade, or what puppet governments they decide to prop up, so long as they don't share a border with Germany.

I don't mean that sarcastically--I can make all sorts of arguments in favor of this attitude. On the other hand, it has obvious, dramatic costs, including the fact that Russia's imperial ambitions are unlikely to stop at the Georgian border.

Well, if you ask the question, shouldn't you make some attempt to answer it? Guess not.

If this war ends up with Russia occupying Georgia, NATO will probably be worse off than it would have been if it had let Georgia join--though to be sure, the US might still be better off. I don't know how likely such a scenario is. But it's been clear for a long time that Russia's goal is to regain its former imperial borders, effectively if not nominally.

That's it. Although the last time I checked (sometime after the break-up of Czechoslovakia) the United Snakes were part (& a pretty big one) of NATO. How NATO could be "worse off" (ugly, stupid phrase, by the way) but the USofA somehow in better shape is beyond this reporter. Especially as US foreign policy toward Georgia, as toward most of the states in Central Asia that have or are near OIL, is to send the US military to train their militaries, & then to sell them weapons & equipment while promising that the US paper tiger has their backs. The military-industrial complex is going to be losing client-states. Can't have that.

So, Megatron, do you have any ideas or suggestions? Where exactly do you stand on this? Yes, it's been obvious for a while to all but perhaps soul-searcher Bush that Putin & the new Russki P. M. want to be big men on the world stage again, but how are "we" to stop them, if "we" should at all? But Megan "can make all sorts of arguments in favor of this attitude," & apparently any other "attitude," w/o coming to any decision.

No, Megan. we apprecitate it.

Apologies:

. . . for the light posting, by the way--I have some sort of hideous lung infection, and a 10:20 doctor's appointment stretched to nearly one. Insert rant on doctor's office scheduling tactics here. Insert second rant about hideous plague-flu that I acquired from a blogger who shall remain nameless.

OMG! This is my favorite McIdiot post ever. First, she gets all narcissistic and apologizes for not spouting out of her ass enough lately. Yes, Megan, thanks for the apology. Our lives were so hollow in the short time that you left them.

Then, she gets all melodramatic about a fucking chest cold. Wahhh! Hideous lung infection, wahh! Do you have bronchitis? Do you have pneumonia? No? Then shut the fuck up and take some Tylenol like the rest of us.

Wahhhhh, she had to wait to be treated for her completely benign illness. POOR MEGAN! Of course, it's all the doctors fault. I guess she would know, because she spent 5 years working at a doctor's office. Oh wait, no, that was me. Hate to burst your bubble, little-Mrs-Perfect, but doctor's usually only run hours late because they get caught up in emergencies. You know what those are, don't you? They're medical problems exactly the opposite of your FUCKING FLU! Fun fact: doctor's offices would be a lot less crowded if Americans didn't rush to get "fixed" when they have the god damn sniffles.

Finally, she wraps it up with some kind of innuendo or name drop or something. I guess we're supposed to be all impressed cause she hangs out with "bloggers" and gets close enough to actually touch their germs! OHHH, SO DREAMY! I wonder who it was? Was it Matt, who she finally gave that long awaited kiss for on his way out the door, or was it that uppity new guy who brought the germs in from his last office? I hope it's the latter so that we can find out if mademoiselle will "ever go back!!!!!"

In summary: Thank god you were gone! STFU about your flu! Stop complaining about commonplace bullshit and we don't fucking care who you were making out with in the copy room. You're not important. Go away.

Do Not Tell Me I Am The Source Of Your Knock-Up. The Mud Elephant, Wading Through The Sea, Leaves No Tracks.

Once again, our heroine saves herself the trouble of coming up w/something clever & original by referring to another web log. (Not unlike the way it's done chez moi, but I digress.)

I've never had a baby, of course[.]

That goes w/o saying. (P. S.: We're all very appreciative of that.)

The interesting question he doesn't ask is what this would do to the politics of parenting.

By "parenting" she means "abortion." (Seriously. Read it.)

The minute you can take an aborted fetus and put it in an artificial womb, that argument falls away, and we get down to what pro-choicers really care about: not having a kid.

Ectogenesis must be pretty special if you can take an "aborted fetus," slap it into one of these artificial wombs, & it will come back to life & grow to term.

I can construct a libertarian argument for a right not to parent, but once the pregnancy leaves the sacred space of the individual body, both the logical and the emotional arguments get a lot weaker. What will society look like when unwanted pregnancies start turning, once again, into unwanted kids?

Can she "construct" (Betcha any argument McM. constructs would collapse in a heap of watery concrete & sub-standard rebar.) an argument for her continuing to pontificate for money? Or "deconstruct" (I know, not correctly used, but how can I resist?) this connection between the pregnancy (fetus?) leaving the woman's body &, well, anything? Does she mean pregnancy in general, having accidentally added the "the" there? Is there an implication that some future theocracy will require any woman who is pregnant to check the embryo/fetus in an artificial womb?

Or, in classic FMM style, what in the hell is she talking about?

Also sad to note: Mlle. McArdle received three times as many comments as the original item @ EconLog.

Humorless Section

Alright, Megan McA. has just about completely lost it.

Your afternoon smile 28 Jul 2008 03:57 pm
Here. No, I can't explain. Just click.

Your click will lead you to this:Enough commenters didn't get it that she felt obliged to do an update.

Update Okay, for those who totally didn't get the joke, perhaps this will explain:

"This" is an imbed of the Baha Men's snappy & popular "Who Let The Dogs Out?" video. I'm either too smart, too stupid, or have no grasp of the obvious, because I "like totally" don't get it. It's a map of the United Snakes, w/ each state given a color on the spectrum between common sense, decency & humanity (New York, Vermont & Jersey) to the aggressively retarded guns & gawd group (Idaho & Utah). And?

Business major?!?!?!?

Megan knows that the economy is bad because:

When even Apple, which can't keep the new iPhone 3G on the shelves, is warning that it expects lean times ahead, you know things are pretty awful.

Yeah, I mean, how can Apple be expecting loss when they have a succesful product! < Matt whispers in ear > You mean Apple makes more than one product?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Now, her failure to understand economics is understandable since she never went to school for it, but she's a fucking MBA!!!!!!! How in the hell does she fail so completely to understand business?

Megan, you really are a moron.