The New England Journal of Forensic Blogginess, Vol IV

The subject's pattern of forming instant attachments to surrogate parent figures (Friedman, Reynolds, Crook, et al) derives from her biological parents' narcissistic cathexes:

My parents, who had both themselves found school excruciatingly easy, certainly never told me I was smart; they believed the important thing was effort, not talent.

"Come back when you've made some progress. Or not. And Clarice?"
"Yes."
"Next time you'll tell me two things. What happened with the horse is one. The other thing I wonder is...how do you manage your rage?"

Debtor's Prison & Forty Lashes

Check also this excerpt from the WSJ that the poor little rich girl ran:

"People have to be responsible for their own actions," says Harry Lancz, a small-business owner in Traverse City, Mich. He holds a pair of fixed-rate mortgages, one for his primary residence, which has been for sale for six months, and one for a second home in Louisiana. "What are you going to do when their credit cards get due and they can't pay? Are you going to bail them out on that, too?"

No, because the credit card industry purchased enough legislators to make it much more difficult to declare bankruptcy a couple of years ago.

Must be easy for a small business owner to get self-righteous about poor people.

Also from the WSJ, a mortgage banker:

says he made a bad investment decision when he bought a $600,000 oceanfront home last December with two subprime loans. But he's committed to making the $6,000 in monthly payments -- and the higher payments once the rates go up.

"A lot of people are trying to point fingers and get themselves out of something they put themselves into," he says. "I put myself in this position. I need to find a way to make it work."

And how is Mr. Mortgage Banker, who should, of all those on the face of this planet, know what a good or bad position is in the first place, going to "find a way to make it work?" Selling even more bad mortgages to other suckers? Get a night gig driving a taxi? Stick up liquor stores? Start counterfeiting? Really? What's he going to do?

Mr. Miller [the incompetent mortgage banker] says that the rate-freeze proposal reminds him of a television commercial: The announcer asks, "Do you owe back taxes?" A client responds, "I settled for half of what I owe." Says Mr. Miller: "How's that fair? Everything seems to be backward."

What would Mr. Miller say if he were offered a better deal on his "bad investment decision?" Turn it down & stick to his original deal? Is he in favor of the maximum sentence on all criminal convictions? And opposed to plea bargaining of any kind? Has he ever changed the terms of a mortgage deal? As one of the local sports columnists says: "These people live among you."

Bring back debtors' prison!

It's not the banks' fault for giving loans to people obviously unqualified for them, it's the poor dumb Americans who took the loans. We're a a free market, dammit, and if they fuck up them n their kids are out in the street. And fuck them for inconveniencing the banks. Or so says Megan;

I said in my previous post that I'm not sure it matters who's at fault, but of course, politically it does matter. Borrowers may have had help getting in over their heads, but at the end of the day, "variable interest rates vary" is not in the realm of things it is unreasonable to expect them to have understood when they signed on for a gigantic mortgage. Indeed, many of the defaulters seem not to be able to afford their teaser rates, which is certainly something they should have been able to figure out on their own. One of the reasons that I do not currently own a home is that I cannot afford one. Now I get to pitch in my tax dollars to bail out people who also could not afford a home, but went ahead and bought one anyway.

But Megan isn't inhuman, that the gubbermint is stepping in to make sure people aren't ending up homeless is one of those things she's philosophically opposed to but will live with, if she has to. I was being unfair, she's not saying they have to be thrown out in the street, just that they deserve to be.

I can't say that this thought is keeping me awake nights; keeping people from losing their homes, however stupidly acquired, strikes me as a better use of my tax money than much of what the government does, especially if this has the side effect of forestalling a financial crisis. And the cost of it is likely to be small compared to, say, invading Iraq or buying prescription drugs for affluent seniors. On the other hand, I am a contented renter, not a family crammed into a small home they could afford on a fixed rate, watching neighbours in bigger houses get a helping hand from Uncle Sam.

You've gotta love the gall of someone born into affluence telling one hypothetical poor family to hate another because the poor idiots fell for those omnipresent "easy credit low terms" ads. I'm not disputing their stupidity, but Megan is ignoring the banks'.

Thankfully

I was wrong to interpret Megan's quiet as sign of an impending storm. A very light day, so far. There is, however, this post on that mini Hitler who dares sin against the holy free market of white people owning everything, Hugo Chavez. There are problems to be had with Chavez even beyond petty complaints about his style, but Megan's real issue here is that neoliberalism, or Friedmanism, or her Hayekian variant on it, or etc, does not hold sway in Venezuela.
Aside: I have to admit that The Shock Doctrine* has had a profound impact on how I read Megan's work, among many other things. The biggest question for me in regards to Megan remains, to put it bluntly, whether she is stupid or maliciously greedy. The two aren't by any means mutually exclusive, but I really wonder whether she's dumb enough to believe she's working for the benefit of humanity, or just feels a need to pretend so. I'm coming to favor the latter, that she's not quite as dumb as she pretends, but is a lot more repugnant, which is saying something.
Returning to the topic at hand, Megan compares Chavez to frukkin Mugabe, which only really makes sense if you consider keeping a country's national resources from being bought in a fixed deal for way below market value by foreign rich white people to be hideously evil. (Which is not to call Mugabe in any way well intentioned.) Even Megan has to half admit the comparison is a reach,

The situations aren't entirely parallel, of course; situations rarely are. But Chavez's crony populism and hamfisted mismanagement of the country's main economic resource, combined with his obvious belief that the world would be a vastly better place if he had a great deal more power, does not exactly make me sing with joy for his nation's prospects.

If only they had a leader willing to put everyone out of work to save their jobs.

*- Also helped me understand why Megan is reduced to ranting against Naomi Klein, instead of rationally taking issue with her. Klein is a real threat to Megan, and has the kind of success and respect Megan can only dream of. The Shock Doctrine is genuinely important.
And yes, I realize the incongruity of an avowed misogynist championing the work of a woman. There's a blow-up doll with a Margaret Thatcher mask on waiting to be punished for it.

New poll

Big whup, yah wanna fight about it?

Megan is too quiet. Tomorrow will bring a hail of race, voucher, and health care posts, I fear. Guard yourselves.

What's Megan Saying Now?

Megan links to a big mistake spotted at the WaPo, which is about one more made up story or story built around bogus rumors from reduction to a total laughing-stock.

I'd also argue that to eliminate this sort of exchange rate confusion, Baker should have used PPP in constant dollars. That figure yields a much more favorable assessment of NAFTA--although still one that makes the Washington Post look wildly off.

My question (Other than, "What's PPP?" And no, don't bother answering; even if you know, I just don't care.): Is Ms. McArdle suggesting that Baker should lie, cheat & steal in order to get his desired (pro-NAFTA?) message across? Will that make people trust Megan even less? She must be in favor of it, it's good for corporations & bad for workers, right?

Megastats: But one lonely post today. Must've been quite a wknd.

Random good news

Binkley is already doing much better, and the second disc of Radiohead's new album is now available from your favorite filesharing app.
Megan broke her posting fast, but not in a way worth genuine notice. Let's all keep enjoying the respite.

Obligatory

Just to follow MM's advice & post on a daily basis (though she must now think she's above that) I decided to peep @ Matt Yglesias, as he's right there in the Atlantic's Voices w/ Megan.

Okay, it's a Sunday and I'm flying back to the states today, so probably not much blogging until later, but starting Monday morning things'll be back to normal.

(He's blogging about blogging; now I'm blogging about him blogging about blogging. Blaaargh!!)

Can you people just keep your announcements of expected output between yourselves & your editors, assuming any of you have editors, or someone exercising some control over your "bloggy activities?" Few of us really give a flying whatever. (Seriously, no one even remotely stable is on the edge of his/her seat awaiting your next missive from on high.) And it's not as if MY hasn't posted four other items today.

Weekend Cat Porn

Poor Binkley is sick. He picked up something from my parents' kitten. He'll be ok, but he worried me a bit this afternoon. Had to take him to a not cheap 24 hour midtown vet, get some antibiotics. Here he is in happy times.


Binkley with the sickness giving kitten, Sasha;


Sasha happily stealing attention from me whut should be Binkley's;


Sasha about to pounce;


Sasha being adorable;


My parents' other cat, Mac, who does not like me or Binkley;


Finally, a shot of sick Binkley, still a little purring furball;



This has been your weekly dose of cat porn.

Lightness & Emptiness

Apparently "blogging will be light." Same here then.

Megastats:

1 item in the last 48+ hrs., just as silly as ever (maybe one's Tivo can read one's mind, realize for what one is best suited, & record accordingly) w/ a link to a "classic" article. (Five yrs. old.) The definition of classicism is not what it used to be. And Ms. McA. gets the title wrong.

Compare this to the staff that calls itself "Andrew Sullivan," 20 items today alone. (And plenty of images to break up the textual monotony!) Even MY, probably a better comparison (as he may not have a "staff" of any kind — see, we hate men too) has five items for today (a Saturday).

Point where I start to worry that I may really be "obsessional": Last two A. I. posts occurred @ 4:42 pm. Is this a signal to glibertarian terrorists? Or should it be a signal to my mental health self-awareness?