Richard A. Epstein and Susan Estrich
Final Thoughts
By Susan Estrich
Posted Thursday, Oct. 19, 2000, at 8:06 PM ETSome final thoughts:
On medicine: I'm not sure how we got here or where it takes us, but I think the idea that who lives and who dies doesn't depend on wealth, that everyone gets the same treatment, the same chance, if not the same amenities is a powerful statement of our values. It's a goal worth seeking, even if imperfectly. From teaching hospitals to trade unions, the view of quality health care as a right and not a privilege, the willingness to spend economically irrational sums to save lives, is another one of those issues, like the minimum wage I suppose, that makes it clear that economics shapes rather than defines us.
On politics: It's another day full of Clinton stories. What it reflects, more broadly, is the growing case of jitters on the Democratic side, frustration with Gore, the campaign, and the sinking feeling that we may be about to lose an election that we should be able to win.
On travel: Best picture of the day, front page of the Los Angeles Times--the board at LAX. Everything was delayed there yesterday because of a software failure; on the East today, the shuttle is apparently running with one-hour delays. Travel is best accomplished these days in a Zenlike state of total acceptance, but look for more calls for, yes, government regulation of the airlines. It's bad in row 37E.
On the Middle East: How unbelievably sad. Ran into a friend yesterday who said all of her friends' sons in Israel are being called up; everyone is getting ready for more violence. Barak can go no further. And then we get the latest "grave lapse" of judgment. Politics is a whole different sport there.
Have a great day. It's been a pleasure sharing breakfast.
Final Thoughts
By Susan Estrich
Posted Thursday, Oct. 19, 2000, at 8:06 PM ETRichard A. Epstein is a professor of law at the University of Chicago and an editor of the Journal of Law and Economics
. Susan Estrich is professor of law at the University of Southern California law school and author of the recently published Sex & Power
(click here to buy it). Reader Comments from The Fray:
[Reaction to
Tuesday's
entry:]
Susan, I do sympathize with the chronic complaints of the overworked, but doesn't the policy debate about how women are held back in the workplace because they're stranded in the kiddy-carpool and swaddled with child-rearing responsibilities come down to the almost universal kvetch--my husband sits like a very still bump a very old log when he gets home and shirks his fair share of child-rearing responsibilities? And while I'm receptive to the problem on a micro level, I do not see why the government should do anything to resolve or influence how this eternal dispute gets settled--on a micro or macro level.
The other aspect of this debate that niggles is this: the issue is one more example of the middle class wanting everything its way. "I want a wildly fulfilling career which pays a lot of money--and be home by 5:00pm to read my little girl bedtime stories." Well, I want to do that but do the feds need to see to it that both mom and dad get to do that? Particularly for the middle class? Suburbia has become so politically dominant, that virtually no program of any significance which would deliver benefits to low-income families can stagger through congress without some sop to the suburbs--and because the suburbs and middle class take up such a large portion of the economy the sop eats up the program that was the reason for the sop in the first place.
--Bob Riley
(To reply, click
here.)
Is Dubya smart enough? What a silly question. As if we really cared about such things. In a country where any kid can grow up to be president, do we honestly believe that if Dubya is at least as smart as we are, that mean's he's smart enough to be president?
If I thought I was smart enough to be president, I'd be running. Instead, I'm smart enough to know I shouldn't be president. It's too bad Dubya doesn't realize he's not smart enough to know he's not smart enough.
Of course, that didn't stop Reagan, either. But then, it turns out that during a critical turn of our nation's existence, our President not only didn't have enough marbles to be president, he was losing more of them every day. Today he's deified by the Republicans and publicly respected by the Democrats. Our world has come down to this: it's okay to be dumb and insane, as long as you don't offend anyone that matters.
--Delbert
(To reply, click
here.)
[Reaction to
Monday's entry:]
In fact Prof. Epstein you are only the second person I have read who has even attempted to broach the subject [of prescription drugs] in an honest fashion (Robert Samuelson in The
Washington Post occasionally takes a stab at it). More fundamentally, the prescription drug issue is part of the general tendency in all segments of society to avoid an unpleasant fact of health care: that under any regime adopted, some entity, be it the state, private insurers, or market pricing, will deny health care technology to people who would benefit from having it, and dearly desire it, due to health care being particularly sensitive to the problem of scarcity, and the understandable desire to satisfy this need before all others. In this vale of tears, no society will ever be able to provide the latest health care technology to all to who wish to have it, and therefore some people will have their health suffer, and perhaps die, for lack of access to the needed technology, no matter what method of production and distribution is adopted. How do you think this sort of frank admission of reality would fly with the electorate? Is it any wonder that politicians lie?
--Will Allen
(To reply, click
here.)
What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
SPONSORED CONTENT
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUpon
Is the Democrats' Health Care Fight a "Prisoner's Dilemma" or a "Battle of the Sexes"?
Sorry, the Iranian Regime Isn't Going To Collapse Anytime Soon
How Vegetative Patients Really Communicate With the Scientists Who Scan Their Brains
The Minstrel Origins of the Phrase "Who Dat?"
Why We Shouldn't Bother Cleaning Up the Great Pacific Garbage Patch
No Director Has Done More With Rubble Than Roberto Rossellini
Reader Comments from The Fray:
[Reaction to Tuesday's entry:]
Susan, I do sympathize with the chronic complaints of the overworked, but doesn't the policy debate about how women are held back in the workplace because they're stranded in the kiddy-carpool and swaddled with child-rearing responsibilities come down to the almost universal kvetch--my husband sits like a very still bump a very old log when he gets home and shirks his fair share of child-rearing responsibilities? And while I'm receptive to the problem on a micro level, I do not see why the government should do anything to resolve or influence how this eternal dispute gets settled--on a micro or macro level.
The other aspect of this debate that niggles is this: the issue is one more example of the middle class wanting everything its way. "I want a wildly fulfilling career which pays a lot of money--and be home by 5:00pm to read my little girl bedtime stories." Well, I want to do that but do the feds need to see to it that both mom and dad get to do that? Particularly for the middle class? Suburbia has become so politically dominant, that virtually no program of any significance which would deliver benefits to low-income families can stagger through congress without some sop to the suburbs--and because the suburbs and middle class take up such a large portion of the economy the sop eats up the program that was the reason for the sop in the first place.
--Bob Riley
(To reply, click here.)
Is Dubya smart enough? What a silly question. As if we really cared about such things. In a country where any kid can grow up to be president, do we honestly believe that if Dubya is at least as smart as we are, that mean's he's smart enough to be president?
If I thought I was smart enough to be president, I'd be running. Instead, I'm smart enough to know I shouldn't be president. It's too bad Dubya doesn't realize he's not smart enough to know he's not smart enough.
Of course, that didn't stop Reagan, either. But then, it turns out that during a critical turn of our nation's existence, our President not only didn't have enough marbles to be president, he was losing more of them every day. Today he's deified by the Republicans and publicly respected by the Democrats. Our world has come down to this: it's okay to be dumb and insane, as long as you don't offend anyone that matters.
--Delbert
(To reply, click here.)
[Reaction to Monday's entry:]
In fact Prof. Epstein you are only the second person I have read who has even attempted to broach the subject [of prescription drugs] in an honest fashion (Robert Samuelson in The Washington Post occasionally takes a stab at it). More fundamentally, the prescription drug issue is part of the general tendency in all segments of society to avoid an unpleasant fact of health care: that under any regime adopted, some entity, be it the state, private insurers, or market pricing, will deny health care technology to people who would benefit from having it, and dearly desire it, due to health care being particularly sensitive to the problem of scarcity, and the understandable desire to satisfy this need before all others. In this vale of tears, no society will ever be able to provide the latest health care technology to all to who wish to have it, and therefore some people will have their health suffer, and perhaps die, for lack of access to the needed technology, no matter what method of production and distribution is adopted. How do you think this sort of frank admission of reality would fly with the electorate? Is it any wonder that politicians lie?
--Will Allen
(To reply, click here.)