Self-Parody: Pessimistic Bias in the Media

I guess it is a pessimistic slant on the issue, but it’s also perfectly true. The alternative would be what? To ignore the disparity? Wouldn’t that be an optimistic bias?

Pessimistic bias is the worst in my judgement because it fuels the other three. “Since we all agree the world is going to hell in a handbasket…” seems to be a starting point for policies that are anti-market, make-work, and anti-foreign.

If your point is that everyone will want to live as long as possible, I don’t see why you’re surprised about the fact that poverty will probably shorten your life being news. Surely this is relevant to people that care about equality of opportunity? If you don’t, I think you’re in a minority.

Remember that the people in the media are but, as Hayek said, “second-hand dealers in ideas”. They only repeat the ideas that are circulating, usually from some dead economist. The fact is that the dominant ideas in the US propagated by the “intellectuals” are welfare-statist (in reality euphimisms for socialism). This is what will be regurgitated in the media, who has taken up the job of dispersing useless knowledge in society.

Big-government conservatism has smothered small-government conservatism. Libertarians are a tiny fraction of society. The overwhelming majority of university faculty and artists are neosocialists. All these people, whether with good intentions or not (I think not), are propagating the same old lies in bold and bright new packaging.

We need someone to take Hayek’s torch and repeal the ideas that undermine our society and lead us in precisely the direction we wanted to avoid. We need another “Road to Serfdom”. Any candidates for recent books which carry some of that same force? (How about Jonah Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism”?).

But shouldn’t it be much more difficult to extend the lives of the wealthy, who already have access to the best medical care, than the poor? I would assume that extending the lives of those who already live the longest would be more difficult (requiring investment in new technologies, etc) than extending the lives of those with shorter lifespans (which might only require ensuring access to existing medical care and technology).

Isn’t a distributional problem implied when the most costly incremental gains are being obtained, while lower cost (and perhaps lower profit) [easy to obtain] gains are not.

Camplin: Leftist bias? Warped view of ‘fairness’? Tell that to someone who will live less long because they are poor and cannot get the health care that they need in the U.S.A..

The fact is, rising life expectancy is and has been the norm. The headline merely emphasizes the fact that there is yet another measure, and in this case a dire one, showing the increasing gap between the haves and the have-nots in this country.

But shouldn’t it be much more difficult to extend the lives of the wealthy, who already have access to the best medical care, than the poor?

You are making the unwarranted and incorrect assumption that spending more money on healthcare is the primary reason why the wealthy live longer than the poor. That is only a minor factor. Two major factors: 1. Intelligence and education correlate with improved health (as independent variables and because educated people make better decisions related to health), and wealthy people usually are smarter and better educated than poor people. 2. Chronic stress worsens health and decreases longevity. Wealthy people tend to have less chronic stress than poor people.

The continual attempts by the media, left-wing spokespersons, and some politicians to instigate class envy or class warfare infuriates me. The standard of living of our single parent welfare families is greater than that of most persons on the planet. Instead of recognizing that, we hear only renewed complaints of unfairness. The only way that our poor will live as well as our rich is if these leftist idiots get their way and make all of us equally poor.

I like this line “The gaps have been increasing despite efforts by the federal government to reduce them.”

I would revise it to say “The gaps have been increasing despite, or perhaps due to, efforts by the federal government to reduce them.”

My extended family is poor, and my wife’s family is poor. My extended family don’t drink for religious reasons, but most of my wife’s family drink quite a bit. Both families smoke like chimneys. You won’t find a lot of fruits and vegetables other than beans and potatoes — though my wife’s family does eat a lot of avocados. You will find a lot of fried food and especially junk food. Both our families eat constantly, and the stuff they eat is junk. Throw in their sendentary lifestyles in front of their TV’s, and is it any wonder they don’t live as long as wealthier people? The gains have been made by wealthier people because they tend to exercise more and eat healthier food. Further, they have been at the forefront of anti-smoking campaigns, while the poor keep on smoking. Throw in the fact that poor people — especialyl the urban poor — are more likely to join gangs and get killed and use hard drugs from questionable dealers, and it’s no wonder they’ve lagged behind.

In the U.S. poverty is a mentality, a state of mind, which needs to be overcome. The Left’s policies are immoral precisely because they perpetuate these problems.

Oh BTW another quote from the Eight Americas study:

Crude self-reported health-care utilization, however, was slightly higher for the more disadvantaged populations.

Bryan: I think to make your point the headline would have to be “Glass 10% EMPTY, Experts Say”

But as far as the public is concerned, there’s no doubt in my mind that it’s the ignorant 99% that spoil it for all of us.