?

Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile My Website Previous Previous Next Next
Mark Atwood
fallenpegasus
fallenpegasus
Pick two.
Food. Good, Fast, Cheap. Pick two.

Work. On time, On budget, On spec. Pick two.

Transportation. Faster, Cheaper, Safer. Pick two.

Abortion. Safe, Legal, Rare. Pick two.

Health Care Policy. Effectiveness, Efficiency, Equity. Pick two.

Social organization in general. Choice, Diversity, Equity. Pick two.


Some of these are choices just for yourself, and you can rechoose again later. Some of these are policy decisions, and the making of the choice and the results of that choice have to be forced onto everyone.


Comments are encouraged. Which two do you pick?
26 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
zanfur From: zanfur Date: January 31st, 2006 04:45 am (UTC) (Link)
Food: good, cheap
Work: on budget, on spec
Transportation: faster, safer
Abortion: safe, legal
Health Care Policy: Effectiveness, Efficiency
Social Organization in general: Choice, Diversity

...equity is just an illusiong, anyway.
mothball_07 From: mothball_07 Date: January 31st, 2006 06:02 am (UTC) (Link)
Food. Good, Fast.
Work. On time, On budget, On spec. Depends on the client, and the context, eh?
Transportation. Faster, Cheaper.
Abortion. Safe, Legal, Rare. Pick two. Disagree that this is the equation.
Health Care Policy. Effective, Equitable. (Not sure effective and efficient are separate... you can have efficient without effective, but can you have the converse?)
Social organization in general. Choice, Diversity.
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: January 31st, 2006 11:22 am (UTC) (Link)
The abortion one is actually what first caused me to noodle this post together. Jane Galt disagrees, and effectively argues that "safe, legal, rare" is a "pick two".
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: January 31st, 2006 11:33 am (UTC) (Link)
The health care policy one, I need to refind the blog article I found about it. The writer of it broke it down, and also mentioned his suprise about learning of it while studying public health at a rather liberal school. If there was any place where people would belive you could have all three, that would be it.
mothball_07 From: mothball_07 Date: January 31st, 2006 04:51 pm (UTC) (Link)
She comes off as either an idiot, or someone with an agenda. She makes several sweeping assumptions :

1) that location of abortions reflects location of those seeking abortion. This is patently untrue. Anyone with any footing in the abortion debate well knows that abortion access is hardly evenly distributed. It is, in fact, one of the major concerns about reasonable access. If this is a topic she's interested in, she must know that. Why did she so carefully ignore it?

2) To claim that the changes due to the (lowered) cost of contraception are uncompelling, yet conclude that raising the price of abortion will make it rarer is simply bizarre. Does she back this up? Or is it simply her axiom that *something* monetary must control behaviour, so if it wasn't contraception, it must be abortion?!

3) She's underwhelmed by increases of "just" 22% of the current use population. I don't share her disregard for this increase, but let's assume it's trivial for now. She presents *no* other human-behaviour modification results to indicate financial effects. For example, if the price of church membership dropped, how much would the membership increase? Any studies? When discussing socially and emotionally loaded behaviors, one doesn't expect finance to be a real standout in making decisions. I would guess it's not the financial aspect of availability AT ALL, but the *ease* of contraceptive availabily, and particularly the visibility of the topic, that leads to the increases in use.

Yes, making abortion $1mil would reduce the incidence of legal safe abortions. So would making it illegal. I fail to see the relevancy. The only people you're going to stop are the people who can't afford it at whatever price-point you set. I seriously doubt there is any statistically meaningful set of persons out there who thinks "oh heck - I'll just have an abortion later." After all, compared to birth control now, it's already terribly expensive. ;)

For most women, *availability* is going to be the main thing that might change a "yes" to a "no". Setting the price high enough can change that. So can making it illegal. Safety is likely a secondary concern in deciding whether to have the abortion, as our pre-legal abortion era makes rather clear. Abortions aren't a consumer product. They're an often desperate decision about the shape of one's future.
tonyawinter From: tonyawinter Date: January 31st, 2006 06:25 am (UTC) (Link)
Food. Good, Fast
Work. On time, On spec.
Transportation. Faster, Cheaper.

Abortion. Safe, Legal.

Health Care Policy. Effectiveness, Efficiency.

Social organization in general. Choice, Diversity.
ljtourist From: ljtourist Date: January 31st, 2006 06:34 am (UTC) (Link)
Food: Good, Cheap.
Work: On time, On spec.
Transportation: Faster, Safer.
Abortion. Safe, Rare. Also disagree that this is the question.
Health Care Policy: Effectiveness, Equity.
Social organization in general: Choice, Diversity.
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: January 31st, 2006 11:24 am (UTC) (Link)
Interesting. You are the first one to choose an "equity". I find it interesting and utterly alien.
mothball_07 From: mothball_07 Date: January 31st, 2006 05:09 pm (UTC) (Link)
I chose equitable.
ljtourist From: ljtourist Date: February 1st, 2006 10:21 am (UTC) (Link)
*shrug*

Well, I'll give my analysis. It may reveal some of my hidden prejudices, which would be cool to find out. I assumed extremes in each case, and pictured the three possibilities given as follows:

Effective, Efficient, Inequitable: A landscape dominated by HMOs that return phone calls and with premiums and co-pays 10-100 times higher than what exist now, plus a smattering of cheap clinics. Medical oligarchy.

Efficient, Equitable, Ineffective: Free clinics on every corner, each containing nothing more complicated than antibiotics.

Effective, Equitable, Inefficient: Like Canada's system with shorter wait times and a 50% federal income tax.

They all sound pretty hellish to me, but the third was the least repugnant.
ljtourist From: ljtourist Date: February 1st, 2006 10:25 am (UTC) (Link)
Oh, and I forgot to add to the last case, post-treatment paperwork that rivals Brazil.
rhonan From: rhonan Date: January 31st, 2006 06:52 am (UTC) (Link)
With some of those, the only reason we can't have all three is because of the status quo. Take abortion: safe and legal are easy to have, in fact, abortion has to be legal to be safe. The reason it is not rare is due to social constructs. Sound, fact-based sex education at all school levels, and easily obtainable contraception are both proven to reduce demand for abortion. Education in general also significantly reduces demand for abortion.
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: January 31st, 2006 11:26 am (UTC) (Link)
I recommend this to your reading. Ms Galt (who is not personally in favor of banning abortion, but doesnt avoid the squickyness of what it actually is), makes an effective and persuisive argument against your position.
(Deleted comment)
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: January 31st, 2006 11:27 am (UTC) (Link)
I knew that one, but I figured it would make too much trouble...
pheonix_jade From: pheonix_jade Date: January 31st, 2006 01:13 pm (UTC) (Link)
I'd like to claim Sane and Available. My track record shows Pretty Insane and Available.
From: furrysantuary Date: January 31st, 2006 08:26 am (UTC) (Link)
Food. Good, Cheap

Work.On budget, On spec

Transportation. Faster, Safer

Abortion. Safe, Rare

Health Care Policy. Effectiveness, Efficiency

Social organization in general. Choice, Equity.
From: furrysantuary Date: January 31st, 2006 08:26 am (UTC) (Link)
oh, change the abortion to safe and legal
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: January 31st, 2006 11:28 am (UTC) (Link)
Interesting that you selected equity over diversity for social organization. That's an interesting and alien viewpoint for me.
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: January 31st, 2006 11:29 am (UTC) (Link)
Especially since you didn't similar select Equity for Health Care Policy.
pheonix_jade From: pheonix_jade Date: January 31st, 2006 01:11 pm (UTC) (Link)
Food: Fast, Cheap. Please, I'll eat almost anything anyway. Quantity over quality.
Work: On budget, On spec. I'm sorry, there's no reason to be slipshod on quality. If you don't have time to do it right the first time, when will you have time?
Transportation: Faster, Cheaper. Once again, my urge to rush shows itself. Hey, if it's fast enough, nobody will be on the road/tunnel/space for that long anyway.
Abortion. Safe, Legal. No use in risking lives. And illegal lends itself towards risking lives.
Health Care. Effective, Efficiency.
Social Choice, Diversity. I was thinking for a bit. Doesn't choice lend itself to diversity? But then, you could eliminate certain options that don't appeal, which in turn limits choice. Meh.
papertygre From: papertygre Date: January 31st, 2006 02:44 pm (UTC) (Link)
Don't forget "SOs: Sexy, Smart, Sane. Pick two."
papertygre From: papertygre Date: January 31st, 2006 02:45 pm (UTC) (Link)
Oh, I see this is not the only version.
fallenpegasus From: fallenpegasus Date: January 31st, 2006 03:05 pm (UTC) (Link)
I like that one so much more than the "single, sexy, sane" version. The main reason I didn't include "single sexy sane" is because the circles I'm in, single isn't necessary.
(Deleted comment)
jatg From: jatg Date: February 2nd, 2006 11:42 pm (UTC) (Link)
1. Food: Cheap and good. I don't think it would kill anybody to have to wait a little bit for a meal.

2. Work. On budget, on spec. I agree with Lawrence. If you don't have the time to do it right the first time,when WILL you have time?

3. Transportation. Faster, Cheaper. You're never going to make transportation 100% safe.

4. Abortion. Safe, Rare. If you have those two things, screw the law.

5. Health Care Policy. Effectiveness, Efficiency, I don't even want to explain why I would choose those options.


6. Social organization in general. Choice, Diversity,
intrepid_reason From: intrepid_reason Date: February 3rd, 2006 08:10 pm (UTC) (Link)
Food: Good, Cheap.
I love good healthy meals I can make in less than an hour, preferably in less than 20 minutes; however, money is more of an issue often than time.

Work: On budget, On spec. I say give the client the product they reqested for the amount you told them it would cost, and they can just fracking wait!

Transportation: Cheaper, Safer. I would like to change cheaper to more fuel efficient, and perhaps ecologically sound.

Abortion: Safe, Rare.
I am totally a support of a woman having a choice. Conversely though I do think there need to be some serious limits on it. Women using abortioin like birth control need to be counseled to get an IUD, a hormonal implant, or if possible have their tubes tied.

Health Care Policy: Effectiveness, Efficiency.

Social organization in general: Choice, Diversity
I just don't think equity is possible. I think it's too subjective.
26 comments or Leave a comment