Streetwise Professor

December 12, 2013

Finding the Silver Lining in the Toxic Cloud, or, Shanghai Meets Obamacare

Filed under: Economics,Politics — The Professor @ 6:02 pm

For the past weeks, Shanghai has been enveloped in a choking toxic smog.   This is a tremendous embarrassment to China, so two official news agencies responded by attempting to find the figurative silver lining in the literal cloud:

In online articles, state broadcaster CCTV and the widely read tabloid the Global Times, published by the Communist Party’s official People’s Daily, tried to put a positive spin on the smog problem.

The Global Times said smog could be useful in military situations, as it could hinder the use of guided missiles – giving the example of smoke used by Serbian forces against Nato airstrikes in the Kosovo war.

Meanwhile, broadcaster CCTV listed five “unforeseen rewards” for smog, including helping Chinese people’s sense of humour.

This came to mind when reading this NYT article which makes every excuse possible for the next predictable failure of Obamacare: the dropping of group coverage by small business, resulting in turning over millions of employees to the tender mercies of The Website From Hell, Medicaid, or, if they’re lucky, the government approved Junk Insurance Plans that would be unconscionable if an insurance company sold them to you (according to Obama, anyways).

All in all, I find the Chinese propaganda more amusing and plausible than the NYT’s.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


  1. @Professor
    You have been on fire since you returned to the US-good posts.

    For me the cognitive dissonance in the US is just as chokingly thick as the Shanghai smog.

    How inconvenient that the lowest ambient temperature ever measured by man came at this time of catastrophic global warming.

    Comment by pahoben — December 12, 2013 @ 10:03 pm

  2. Amazing! When large employers in general and WalMart in particular have employees eligible for Medicaid they get attacked as “having their employment costs being subsidized by the government. But when small employers do it the same people seem to think that is OK. That is the problem with the anti WalMart propaganda, it ignores the fact that if you put higher costs on large employers but don’t require it on smaller employers, in an industry such as retailing, you will drive the larger employers out of business with no, and probably negative improvement in total (societal) payroll, while losing the other efficiencies of larger operators.

    Comment by JavelinaTex — December 12, 2013 @ 11:22 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress