Of Things that Annoy Me This is Close to the Top

|

If you don't like meanspirited posts, stop right now, and please continue to read the more even tempered and insightful commentaries of my big-souled colleagues. O.K. Let's move on. The Washington Post is running an article today about rich kid heirs who feel guilty about being "privileged" meeting at something called Resource Generation to whine about their burdens. Look, if your parents gave you their money, as far as I'm concerned you can fritter it away on diamonds or the destitute. Your choice.

But a specific example of moral posturing really irritated me. From the Post:

Janelle Treibitz, 28, a part-time waitress who performs with the Puppet Underground performance group, which raises money for grass-roots organizations, could relate.

"In Vermont [this year], I broke my finger and didn't have insurance," said Treibitz, whose father is chief executive of a Colorado company that designs visual presentations for court trials. "I got my X-ray and gave [the hospital] a fake name and walked out. Is that okay that I am doing that—taking up resources because I am refusing to take money from my parents?"

Let me help Ms. Trebitz with her moral quandary: NO! IT IS NOT OK!

Just how much might a visit to a Vermont emergency room have cost her? Vermont offers a price list of outpatient diagnostic services available at acute care hospitals. A level 1 emergency visit averages a total of $207. A level two visit costs an average of $309. Maybe Ms. Trebitz would have had to take some time off from her protest puppeteering to work full time as a waitress in order to pay this off, but these charges would not have bankrupted her. Her lying to get free medical care was simply, hmm, how shall I say it? The act of an irresponsible overprivileged morally smug rich kid.

Advertisement

NEXT: Stop the Violence: Legalize Drugs

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Yeah, but… puppets! I love Lamb Chop, I love Fraggle Rock… Mr. Snuffleuppagus f—s my sh-t up.

    1. SHE BROUGHT PUPPETRY TO THE COMPANY PICNIC!

  2. There is nothing wrong with refusing to take your parents money or trading on your name. But, you have to actually you know make it on your own. Being a no good bum who steals from the emergency room is not okay even if you are doing it in lieu of taking daddy’s money.

    Maybe we really do need a draft. The only thing is we should weight the numbers by family income. The more money your parents have the more likly you name is going to come up.

    1. Seriously, the whole point of not taking Daddy’s money is to declare your independence. if you are going to be a fucking welfare dependent living by theiving and collecting government checks, you’re defeating the purpose.

    2. Instead of taking Daddy’s money, she’s taking someone else’s money.

      1. The irony is that its still Daddy’s money. I guess daddy’s money becomes sacrosanct when first passing through the interlocetor that is Uncle Scam.

    3. Maybe we really do need a draft. The only thing is we should weight the numbers by family income.

      So you support this form of slavery, because one snotty rich theif pisses you off?

      1. You can say that again!

    4. Maybe we really do need a draft. The only thing is we should weight the numbers by family income.

      So you support this form of slavery, because one snotty rich theif pisses you off?

  3. Free rider!

  4. WTF? These idiots don’t want to take money from their parents (fine, if that’s your principle, sure), so they take money from random other taxpayers and people in society?

    1. Pretty much what I was gonna post.

      That and calling her a vapid cunt.

      1. God I love the word cunt, sometimes bitch just isn’t enough.

        /female

    2. I wish I would have been there to tell them that some actual poor person will later be denied some life-saving care because of the resources they used up despite the ample ability to pay.

      It’s a stretch, but I bet I could convince them. Anything short of making them cry would be a failure.

      1. Making liberals cry is pretty easy. Doesn’t mean it’s not fun, though.

  5. I got my X-ray and gave [the hospital] a fake name and walked out.

    As a hospital lawyer, I have a new hobby. I file criminal complaints against people like this for theft of services. At her level, it was a misdemeanor, but you can get to a felony real quick with shit like that.

    1. Don’t worry. If you can just get a misdemeanor on her record she is a two time loser if it ever happens again. That means that if she steals so much as a candybar and gets caught, she actually goes to jail. And it is on her record that she is a theif. Good luck getting a job that has any kind of backround check. Getting even a minor conviction for a real crime, versus some bogus DUI or traffic charge, is a nasty deal.

      1. Uh, three strikes laws cover felonies, not misdemeanors. Aren’t you a lawyer?

    2. Something tells me your pro bono service will never be covered in the Harvard Law Bulletin.

  6. Remember when joe used to say there was no such thing as white liberal guilt? Those were the good old days, weren’t they?

    1. Where’s Chad, Joe’s stand in.

  7. you could send her a message on Facebook here http://www.facebook.com/janelle.treibitz

    1. Wow, her FB page makes me hate her even more. “Forgive Student Loan Debt to Stimulate the Economy”. I guess thats one more way she wants to stick it to her dad while leeching off taxpayers.

  8. Why is this post anonymous?

  9. Yo, fuck Ms. Trebitz.

    (I haven’t seen a yo, fuck…. in a while and this story seems to demand one)

  10. Her lying to get free medical care was simply, hmm, how shall I say it? The act of an irresponsible overprivileged morally smug rich kid.

    Shorter, and more to the point:

    Her lying to get free medical care was STEALING.

  11. You know, I could see her problem here. When your political philosophy is all about involuntary redistributionism, not being able to understand theft of services seems like a natural consequence.

    “Stealing is wrong” is much easier to understand, as opposed to “stealing from some people is a great thing because they don’t deserve to have more than anyone else.” Doesn’t the hospital have more than her? It’s OK to steal from them, right?

  12. Which finger was broken?

    This one?

    This one?

  13. Damn, somebody needs to punch her in the taint.

  14. 1. I don’t think this was mean-spirited. (The crying Santorums post, e.g., was much worse, IMO.)

    2. Who authored this one?

    3. OK, I know this isn’t a popular position here, so I’ll just say this once and let it go. This woman is confused because modern Western society has no moral foundation anymore. Religion is out in most parts of the West. But rights-based libertarians (as opposed to purely utilitarian libertarians) have found nothing to take the place of religion as something to stand on when extolling individual freedom & responsibility over the demands of the state/community/”the people”/whatever on which liberals base their claims.

    1. As to 3… Yes, religion really stamped out that thousand years of feudal serfdom 99% of Europeans lived under.

      If religion made you moral, the world wouldn’t be anywhere near as shitty as it is.

    2. But rights-based libertarians (as opposed to purely utilitarian libertarians) have found nothing to take the place of religion as something to stand on when extolling individual freedom & responsibility over the demands of the state/community/”the people”/whatever on which liberals base their claims.

      Really? Rationality and objective standards of responsibility isn’t something to stand on? It has to be organized to be “something?” Belief in the self isn’t enough?

      I call major bullshit, unless I am missing your point.

      1. I also have to call WTF on this: “purely utilitarian libertarians.” Completely opposed ideologies.

        1. No kidding. P Brooks doesn’t know his ass from a Kant in the ground.

          1. LOL, whoops, wrong named, sorry.

      2. Major bullshit.

      3. I would suggest reading the first half of Richard Posner’s Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. (In all seriousness — it’s a fantastic book.) What he does (I think decisively) is show that all moral reasoning ultimately boils down to unprovable assertions of “I think X is morally right.” There’s no way to prove, using only the tools of reason, to someone who believes that X is right that she’s mistaken, and that actually Y is right.

        Posner’s position as a consequence is what he calls “pragmatic moral skepticism,” which is logically necessary but functionally suicidal, because it leaves the question of morals up to consensus.

        1. But if you believe like I do, that morals has always been a consensus position, then religion is merely a way to build (or shape) a consensus as opposed to foundation for an objective morality. I just become a partisan game, instead of a search for truth.

          1. Man, I cannot type today.

          2. I agree, and I think that’s the whole problem. We haven’t found anything to shape and solidify a consensus the way religion could. Our written constitution helps, but people who don’t value individual rights can always justify twisting the constitution to support collectivism.

            Ayn Rand maybe could have done the job, if she had been a better novelist and less of nut.

            1. I think self-ownership generates the full set of negative rights. It’s not mystical, it’s simple, and it makes a fine basis for punishment is infringed.

              Frankly, the notion that you own yourself is so blindingly obvious that anyone who can’t grasp it is not worthy to possess it.

              (Not a slight toward you, just a general statement.)

              1. I like the “don’t be a douchbag” rule.

                1. Unfortunately, some people just define that as a prohibition against spraying vinegar and water at people.

                2. “do unto others” works the same, but with less fun words.

          3. You’d have to be careful with that argument. It seems like it’s only a hop, skip, and jump away from moral relativism.

            Under such a system, I’m sure you already realize this, you can’t establish fault. A murderer can simple claim that he’s not responsible for his asks since he’s the product of his environment.

            Religion can not only be used to establish a moral consensus, but it’s the only way to make an appeal to anything higher than ourselves.

            If individual rights are not “God given”, then they have to be established by something. You can say self-ownership, but I think that without religion in place to establish a higher law than man’s, society would eventually degenerate to a point where natural selection is the only rule.

            Darwin made the same observation after he realized the implication of his evolutionary theory. Man is really no greater than any other animal and as such we are eventually doomed to act like them. Then the 20th Century happened…

            1. Moral philosophy based on the metaphysical always boils down to people only behaving morally when they feel the sword of Jehovacles hanging over their head. Sounds more like a utilitarian argument favoring fear over all else.

              1. Not if you subscribe to Kant’s reasoning – as in, you should do the right thing because it is the right thing to do. Moral action is the end itself instead of a means to an end.

                That train of thought also makes the What Would Jesus Do bracelets almost meaningless. It encourages people to do something because they think it’s what Jesus would do instead of doing something because it’s right.

            2. Morals are relative. Think of all the things in the past or even different cultures right now that, in context, were or are considered perfectly moral.

              Morals as consensus means morals are relative because consensus is opinion and opinion continually shifts.

              Self-ownership is individual negative rights. Anyone violating those rights opens themselves up for a violation of their negative rights to be considered a moral act.

              And appeal to a divine higher power is a terrible basis for solving moral disputes. I’m an atheist. What temporal power does God have over me (other than a completely immoral initiation of force by his adherents)?

              A better “higher power” is the social contract, an interlocking web of respect for negative rights that undergirds civil society. (Forget about Tony/Chad’s continual use of social contract to justify constant violation of self-ownership. It’s as corrupt as their fantasies about positive rights, luck, and society owning it’s members.)

              Ultimately, if you recognize self-ownership, I don’t care what path you take to get to it. God, enlightened self-interest, pseudo-theistic gnosis, etc. But to say that non-theists are incapable of morality or devoid of an ethical framework is easily refuted by the evidence.

              1. Self-ownership has a straightforwardness to it that would make it a good candidate as a foundational “truth.” The problem I see is that, unless one is an anarcho-capitalist, statism always gets a toe-hold that statists can use to justify more and more “for-the-good-of-all” interference. “Why should it be OK to impose taxes for an army but not for schools?” etc. And then you’re back in the soup.

                1. But how well has religion fought off statism? How much of that invention has been at the behest of religious conviction?

                  And I don’t really think self-ownership is the capital T truth. I just think everything would be better if that’s where every conversation of rights began. I like to think of it as an axiom that has something for everyone. 😉

              2. Social morals are relative. I’m talking about the existence of absolutes – as in, absolute Truth with a ‘T’. To say “there is no absolute Truth” is making an absolute statement thereby negating your point. Personally, I take a kind of agnostic view of absolute Truth where I believe that the absolute does exist, however it’s not always obvious.

                During the Nuremberg Trials, the defense was based almost solely on the premise that morals are relative, and the Germans as a nation created laws justifying the Holocaust. Finally, one of the judges stood up and exclaimed “Is there no law higher than our own?”

                I think your argument that respect of personal rights as a foundation for morality is a good one. Especially considering that more of the nation is becoming atheistically inclined – the idea of “God given” rights holds little weight to them.

                I’m certainly not saying that non-theists cannot be moral people. As I mentioned to someone below, most of my best friends are atheists and agnostics.

                What worries me is that once man has killed God, as Nietzsche says, the logical substitution is that man should take God’s place. If you replace God with Science, you’re essentially replacing God with Nature…whose only law, besides the physical ones, is natural selection which justifies anything a person is capable of.

                I like the idea of the respect for individual rights, but it’s a new one to me and I’d like to think through it more thoroughly.

                1. Same general notion I have, I just come from the other end to get there: Since absolutes are non-obvious, and therefore functionally unknowable, they are not a stable basis for morality.

                  Even to the point that I think that competing claims over absolute morals are much more dangerous to human freedom than their confirmed absence ever could be.

                  To all: Nice to have a morals debate without any name-calling. It was refreshing.

                  1. To all: Nice to have a morals debate without any name-calling. It was refreshing.

                    Same here. Thanks for the engagement.

                2. I pretty much agree with what James just wrote (at 12:37).

                  It’s hard to say how things might have been different if religion hadn’t taken such a beating. Since modern democracy, enlightenment rationalism, and the industrial revolution/capitalism all picked up speed at about the same time, the infancy of liberal statism and the dotage of moral absolutes overlapped and may or may not have accelerated each other. It’s one reason why I sadly expect the U.S. to continue on its downward slide into totalitarianism (or “democratic despotism,” if you will).

            3. What we need are Asimov-ic Robotics Laws applied to human morality. It shouldn’t be too hard. I’ll give mine a go:

              1. You own yourself, No one may harm you or imitate force against you, excepting as described in Rule 3.
              2. You may not harm another person, or cause harm to be done to them through your own actions.
              3. The use of force may be used against you if you initiate force against another.

              Done. That’s just off the top of my head and probably conforms with the non-agression principle.

              1. imitate = initiate

                Stupid spell check

        2. While being completely aware that no one as of yet has seem to reconcile Hume’s is/ought problem. This… that all moral reasoning ultimately boils down to unprovable assertions of “I think X is morally right.” There’s no way to prove, using only the tools of reason, to someone who believes that X is right that she’s mistaken, and that actually Y is right… seems to be just a restatement of Hume’s analysis.

          We haven’t found anything to shape and solidify a consensus the way religion could. I don’t see why we can build a consensus out of Schweitzer’s life affirmation philosophy. And yeah, maybe life affirmation is built upon nothing more than empathy for your fellow living creatures. but I can’t think of anything better.

          Our written constitution helps, but people who don’t value individual rights can always justify twisting the constitution to support collectivism.

          This is a very good point. The constitution was a way to objectify, a way to put in black and white a moral code. But lawyers, who practice adversarial sparing, as opposed to critical thinking, have made a mockery out of language.

        3. Morals have to be derived from basic unprovable axioms:

          People have self-ownership

          vs.

          It is right to steal from others or compel them to obey my will if I personally benefit

          Of course, liberals will fervently deny that the latter is their core principle from which all else derives, but it sure fucking IS.

          Both of these are values, not assertions that can be objectively proven right or wrong, in the sense that one always leads to better outcomes for everyone, because someone always benefits and someone always is worse off under one system or the other.

    3. This woman is not confused or directionless without religion. She is merely a self-centered twat.

      1. You usually look like an idiot.

    4. Yeah. We need more Christian folks to display their morality for all to see.

      Like these folks do.

      You can take your smug self declared religion based morality* and ram it up your ass.

      * Does not apply to all theists. Just the ones who think morality can only be built on that foundation.

      1. J Sub, Just a few up in the threaded section here clears up his thought a little bit and makes more sense.

        While not overly religious myself, I now understand what he’s trying to get at in the first post.

        1. Thanks.

          (Words added to avoid spam filter.)

      2. First of all, I’m a Christian…

        Second of all, I found that the majority of the kids I went to church with were total douche bags, and I concluded that their parents must also be douche bags.

        While I’m still a Christian, the majority of my best friends so far have been agnostics and atheists. It seems that if you’re an asshole, you’re going to act like an asshole whether you’ve got religion or not.

        1. Did we live some kind of a twin life? I am Christian to. But I generally can’t stand many Christians.

          1. The way my parents explained it to me was that they had to choose religion or education. They chose education. So, I went to the best school in the state while all the kids I went to church with went to the Christian schools.

            As a result, my faith was challenged on a daily basis and I quickly learned to defend it. I became disenchanted with most Christians because they seemed to not care about the theology behind what they say they believe. It’s a shame.

    5. As to #3 …. Religion is out in most parts of the West

      Oh how I wish it were true. Got to say Joplin or Springfield, Missouri and look at all the fucking churches. Secondly, you don’t need religion to provide a moral base. I would suggest The Euthyphro, by Plato. God still hasn’t take the time to respond.

      purely utilitarian libertarians
      ..a sphincter says what… WTF is a utilitarian libertarian? In the utility world, the product of the happiness calculus may very well require the death of an innocent human being if that is going to produce the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest numbers of people. Us libertarians, OTOH, proudly tell the vast majority to go fuck themselves.

      Third, I think the Harm principle is a awesome fucking foundation for any ethos of any society. You leave me and my stuff alone, I will leave you and your stuff alone. It also happens to be life affirming.

    6. Attorney: I trust you noted in the comments lower in this thread that Ms. Treibitz specifically cites her religious upbringing to justify her radical politics, which presumably included ripping off a hospital emergency room?

      When you start claiming that you know what sky gods want you to do, you can justify just about anything.

      1. Yes, that’s true. However, when most people in a society share the same meta-ethical framework, one can use logic within that framework to show which actions are right and which wrong. There’s still disagreement about details, of course, but at least one is able to say “We all agree that A B and C are wrong. From that, I can show that D is also wrong.” Modernly, we’re in a situation where people can’t even agree on first principles. As a result, there’s no defense against liberal progressivism short of “converting” the liberals, if you will.

        Religion’s not coming back in the West. I get that. My point is that its absence does leave people like this woman and her parents better able to “make their own opinions” (some kind of New Age-y self-serving mush of diluted Judaism and Pete Seeger, no doubt) and remain convinced of their rightness notwithstanding any authorities and arguments we might throw at them. That’s a problem for those who want to stop the mental fungus infecting people like this woman.

  15. BSJ & Attorney: Ooops! Software glitch on authorship fixed.

    1. Didn’t we just donate, like, a lot of money? Can’t the gerbils be fixed now?

  16. But rights-based libertarians (as opposed to purely utilitarian libertarians) have found nothing to take the place of religion as something to stand on when extolling individual freedom & responsibility over the demands of the state/community/”the people”/whatever on which liberals base their claims.

    My peculiar brand of libertarianism is fundamentally based on that oldy-but-goody Golden Rule (Not He Who Has the Most Gold…– the other one).

    What do you reckon this part-time waitress says when she gets stiffed by a customer?

    1. What do you reckon this part-time waitress says when she gets stiffed by a customer?

      “Namaste.”

      1. “What do you reckon this part-time waitress says when she gets stiffed by a customer?”

        “I told you not to get it in my hair!”

        1. That was full of win Kyle.

          1. threadwinner

    2. What do you reckon this part-time waitress says when she gets stiffed by a customer?

      Oh that’s a beautiful idea. Sug? Extended backpack duty beckons. If she’s in my area, I’ll take this one for you.

      1. BTW, I don’t do The Facebook, so if someone wants to check her Facebook page and see if she lists her employer, I WILL be there to stiff her.

        I’d like to come up with a way to not actually stiff the restaurant (and not get arrested too). Any ideas how to pull this off?

        1. She’s got a “friends only” page. No employer listed, unfortch.

          1. Taking into consideration the woman hating stalking going around this board, that’s a good thing. How many of her friend’s list did you scan through? Did you save any pictures?

        2. Pay the bill, but instead of a tip leave a note that says “If 40 more people do this today, it might almost make up for that hospital bill you ran out on, you ignorant twat.” Name calling completely optional, and open for editing.

          Leaving her with a short till would be cool, but unless you can manage a side agreement with the owner beforehand, not really worth the risk.

          1. Your idea about the note gives me a semi-hard penis.

        3. No tip seems obvious enough.

        4. No employer listed on her FB, sadly. She’s got “UDC Justice Caf?, Washington DC” listed in her groups, but that seems more like a volunteer group than an actual business.

        5. Tough one. You have to get seated at her table on a day she’s working, which if my assumption is correct, will be sporadic. Problem is, she may provide very poor service so not tipping her while still paying your tab would be the normal course of action and she’s probably used to it. I suggest an alternative course of action.

          Go in smelling like you slept in a dumpster and dressed like you shop at a dumpster. Make sure you identify her and sit at her table. Be a belligerent prick. Pay with your platinum card. Have your friend video tape her reaction from a neighboring table. Upload to YouTube sans tough questions.

          Change your appearance and try something new every day to see how she reacts to different juxtapositions of your perceived socio-economic status.

          One of these “appearances” by you should have you explaining to her how you wished rich liberals would pool their money to provide health insurance or health care for the uninsured rather than demanding everyone be taxed to death for it.

          1. Fuck you.

            1. What? I said he just needs to smell and dress like you. I didn’t say he had to take over your living quarters.

  17. Is that okay that I am doing that — taking up resources because I am refusing to take money from my parents?”

    “But I’ll take your money, even though you don’t know me and I don’t know you, so that makes it OK, right?”

    Seriously? Where do you go to learn to become this fucking amorally vapid? What school teaches “How to be a worthless sponge for the rest of your life.”?

    As a parent whose children often say and do things that I haven’t taught them to do (and often say and do things I have practially killed myself getting them to NOT do), I hesitate to blame the parents here. BUT, you need to come get your child, NOW, and beat some fucking sense into her.

    1. “where to go to learn to become this fucking amorally vapid?”

      Columbia University?

      1. NYU, actually.

  18. This is a surprise to me now. Ron’s usually one of the most even tempered writers here.

    Kudos Ron. A bit of rage helps cleanse the (non-existent)soul from time to time.

  19. What a privileged bitch. How does refusing to take money from your parents excuse pissing on the time and skill of the nurses, doctors, and patient techs that handled her?

    And to Attorney: I always found that the words of Esme Weatherwax were particularly apt “There’s no grays, only white that’s got grubby. I’m surprised you don’t know that. And sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That’s what sin is.” For advice from a fictional character I’ve always found it pretty apt.

    1. Esme is my second favorite person.

  20. But rights-based libertarians (as opposed to purely utilitarian libertarians) have found nothing to take the place of religion as something to stand on when extolling individual freedom & responsibility over the demands of the state/community/”the people”/whatever on which liberals base their claims.

    All that time I spent writing about the categorical imperative was apparently wasted on some people.

  21. What I thought of reading this article (with shat goodness).
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXWEM4gZhg4

  22. She’s actually a morally smug rich thief, right?

    My first editor (oh, you shoulda seen the characters in the newsroom in those inkstained days!) once saw me slacking off and reading the paper when I should have been working, and said, “You know, that’s theft. You are stealing the company’s money when you get paid for doing nothing.” And she was absolutely goddamn right.

    More things should be called what they are: theft. Taking an object without payment or permission is theft. Taking a service without payment or permission is theft. Doing puppetry when you’ve got bum finger and know you won’t put on a decent show is theft of the audience or sponsor’s money. Bankruptcy is a legalized form of theft.

    This no longer young woman could have taken money from willing family members. Instead she chose to steal from strangers.

    1. This no longer young woman could have taken money from willing family members. Instead she chose to steal from strangers.

      But they were evil, profit seeking, health care provider strangers! So it’s justified.

      /snark

      1. As opposed to good, rent seeking, health care provider strangers that Congress is proposing to mandate us use?

      2. Odds are decent that the hospital was actually a non-profit.

    2. Bum finger? Sounds pretty nasty.

    3. EOM

    4. If you’re paid hourly, I’d agree you’re stealing if you don’t work the full hour, but if you get paid a salary for completing certain work and meet your deadlines, how is it stealing if you spend half your time commenting on H&R and still get all your assigned work done?

      1. Damn straight!

      2. Thank you for justifying my obsession.

    5. You were lucky. I had a crusty old boss who truly believed that if you weren’t miserable, you weren’t working hard enough.

      He was an incredibly demanding guy and burned through underlings like popcorn, but if you could put up with his demands you learned a ton.

      He was like your editor, completely loyal to the company and believed you owed the company your utmost best at all times.

    6. Tim,

      I don’t know if you realize this, but a lot of your loyal readers are people fucking off at boring jobs. Just saying.

  23. Dear Janelle Treibitz: you’re 28 years old; it’s time for you to grow up, apply yourself to something, and get a real job. That way you won’t have commit fraud against the taxpayers, you worthless f*cking piece of crap.

    1. Janelle Treibitz, I agree with Mike M. that you should apply yourself to something. Considering that you were forthright in admitting that you are good at sucking up resources, perhaps you have a bright future on your knees.

      1. It reaslly is amazing whenever the subject of scorn is a woman how quickly comments here move to how that cunt should be on her knees sucking dick. So not only do you need to be a white males in their 20-30’s to be a libertarian true believer, you have to be a misogynist as well.

        1. You still got a little bit of cum by the corner of your mouth, bitch.

          1. Mr. Bailey? You said you would never tell!

        2. I agree with this and try to refrain from such euphemisms, but, like life and ejaculate, anger is messy. Anger at worthless leeches throwing their moral debauchery in your face is messier still.

          Kyle showed us how it can be done with humor and a modicum of taste.

        3. If it were a man we were talking about, we’d probably be saying similar things, except having to do with fucking other men, or something along those lines. I think we’re equal opportunity haters around here.

  24. Is this chick an OBERLIN alum?

    1. Gah! Oberlin! Grr!

      1. NYU.

  25. Well, I must admit that I come from decently wealthy parents. They didn’t start out that way though. They lived in a trailer home for several years after they married, and now they’ve put three kids through private (mostly) high schools and college.

    I understand that she doesn’t want to take money from her parents. I learned the same lesson early on, but I actually applied it.

    I learned that my Dad paid for something, he felt like he could tell me what do. As a result, I pay for absolutely everything I can. The same thing applies for the government. When the government pays for something, they can tell you what to do.

    She’s probably just really stupid and didn’t quite pick up on the parallel…

  26. Bankruptcy is a legalized form of theft.

    Please explain.

    1. You are allowed to stiff your creditors for services and goods they provided to you in good faith, and you are allowed to tear up contracts you signed before god and man and goddess and woman. For your creditors the effect is not different than if you had taken the money from their pockets, hacked into their services, or in any other way taken their property.

      I’m not saying I oppose bankruptcy protection. I’m just saying call it what it is.

      1. “You are allowed to stiff your creditors for services and goods they provided to you in good faith, and you are allowed to tear up contracts you signed before god and man and goddess and woman.”

        Circumstances change. No one can know the future. That’s why creditors charge interest.

        1. not to be pissy, but creditors charge interest to make a profit.

          1. part of the interest is their profit part if the interest is to pay for the risk they are assuming. This is the “risk premium”… this is the reason why a secured loan like a mortgage has a lower interest rate than an unsecured loan like a credit card

            1. true enough. do they give that back when premiums exceed losses?

              1. Do they get money back when losses exceed interest income?

                You charge interest on receivables so that 1) your credit customers pay you on time and 2) you can risk offering credit to new customers. You’re trying to make money on sales, not interest (unless you’re a lender by nature). If you’re lucky enough to make money on the interest, good for you.

              2. do they charge more when theor losses exceed what they have charged? The idea is that a lender is absorbing risk… if it ends up being less they make more… if its worse, they make less. Thats what you as a borrower are paying for… the lender absorbing that risk.

              3. do they charge more when theor losses exceed what they have charged? The idea is that a lender is absorbing risk… if it ends up being less they make more… if its worse, they make less. Thats what you as a borrower are paying for… the lender absorbing that risk.

      2. You are allowed to stiff your creditors for services and goods they provided to you in good faith, and you are allowed to tear up contracts you signed before god and man and goddess and woman.

        Creditors whose contracts are torn up get their damages claim, which they would have even if the debtor had not filed bankruptcy. They get in line with all the other unsecured creditors. If the debtor has enough to pay the unsecureds something, then the contract claimants will get something. If not, not. In essence, it’s the same thing that would happen if a bankruptcy court were never involved, except that a creditor can’t improve his position simply by being able to get the debtor to pay him before some other poor bastard.

      3. Bankruptcy that wipes out debts is legalized theft … proceedings that reorganize debt (especially as regard to companies rather than individuals) is not. It is a reasonable way to protect assets and solve competing claims of general creditors

        1. Furthermore, regarding the tearing up of contracts, creditors always have the option to insist on security (in which case they have much more protection against bankruptcy shenanigans). I use to do Latin American restructurings in jurisdictions where the bankruptcy laws were, let’s say, less reliable. Restructuring those companies voluntarily was nearly impossible because debtors could basically give general creditors the finger and keep operating – cost of capital was much higher to build in the risk.

        2. You’re right. I should have specified that it’s different for personal bankruptcies. (Too bad body execution is no longer legal!)

      4. Also, note that bankruptcy and defaulting on your debts ends up raising rates for everyone else who is paying honestly. This is why I generally avoid using credit cards. While I certainly hate a large deal of credit card usury and exploitative interest rates, consumer irresponsibility and living beyond one’s means unfortunately ends up imposing heavily on those who are responsible. It’s definitely an indirect form of theft.

  27. It annoys me that when someone’s wealth can come from the sheer luck of having the right parents that person’s claim to that wealth is still justified on the premise that wealth is the product of hard work and determination.

    1. Thieves often comfort themselves with this kind of sentiment.

      Fuck off, troll. The adults are talking.

      1. I don’t see any, please tell us SF, what are you making up for? What short comings in your life lead you to respond the way you do, because it’s pretty obvious you’re trying to make up for something. It oozes through your irritated posts.

    2. I agree that it is unfair that people are rich just because daddy and mommy were rich, but the true discrection on how to use the money lies with the parents. It is their money and can do what they like with it – give it to Ralph Nader, spend it on a bubble-gum monuntain, and disinherit their brats.

      The alternative – have the government take everything – is much worse.

    3. that’s because you have the brain power of mouse.

      1. * a mouse…

        which law is that?

    4. Looks like Mother Nature dealt you a bad hand, Tony. Who are you going to blame that on?

      Don’t be a bitch.

    5. Just because you have to look one generation up on the family tree (or however many), doesn’t mean the money wasn’t earned at some time.

    6. It annoys me even more that whiny piss-ants, like you, think that someone else’s wealth is any of your fucking business.

      And what Sug said.

    7. It annoys me that your annoyed. If I work hard to leave the money to my children what business is it yours. Why, because the people who inherit money didn’t work for it.

      You support taxation and income redistribution, don’t you Tony. It annoys me that I have to work hard to earn an income and then the government hands over that money to someone who possibly didn’t work as hard in the name of equality.

      1. Of course I support taxation and income redistribution. You have to unless you’re an anarchist. And why would I want to be an anarchist? That would be stupid.

        1. I’m an anarchist; the ultimate conclusion of morality.

  28. if these cry babies feel so guilty maybe they should give all their money away to charity… but i can guarantee you wont see any one of these spoiled punks doing that anytime soon. you see they love money and having it too much to do that. they just wont admit it. nobody feels sorry for these people being rich. they need to grow the fuck up.

    1. The advantage that poor people have over the rich is that the rich can’t delude themselves with the notion that all their problems would disappear if they just had a ton of money.

      1. Once you get past the envy part, being poor is a lot less stressful.

        1. Yes, because worrying about where to go skiing for your vacation is so much easier than worrying how you are going to eat.

          1. Aargh.. harder, not easier. Combine this with my “s” typos above and I start looking as poorly educated as John.

  29. I am so pure at heart that wealth does not affect me adversely. If your inherited wealth makes you feel guilty or insecure, please, do not hesitate to forward some or all of it to Mr. Pro Libertate, Tampa, Florida.


    1. …By battle, murder or sudden wealth, by pestilence, hooch or lead —
      I swore on the Book I would follow and look till I found my tombless dead.

      see, sudden wealth can be deadly. please forward all dangerous sums to me.

      Mr. Ransom
      Greenville, SC

      1. There is nothing deadly about my wealth, only the ways I choose to spend it.

  30. Masthead
    Published Fri, Nov 20, 2009 04:55 AM
    Modified Fri, Nov 20, 2009 05:16 AM
    Blunt doctor gets in trouble

    RALEIGH Dr. Earl Sunderhaus, an Asheville eye doctor, has what might charitably be described as a brusque bedside manner.

    That much is not in dispute.

    But the N.C. Medical Board may decide Sunderhaus overstepped the bounds of decency when he recently told a patient she was irresponsible for being unemployed, on Medicaid, and relying on taxpayers to cover another pregnancy after giving birth less than a year earlier. What really galled her, the patient complained, is that Sunderhaus poked her thigh and told her she is fat.

    “When I got home I was very upset about the way I was treated by him,” the patient wrote in a private complaint to the board. Efforts to contact the patient were not successful.

    Sunderhaus, who describes himself as a plain-spoken old German, escalated the conflict by writing the patient to drive home his points using numbered paragraphs and signing it “sincerely.”

    Then, Sunderhaus fired off opinionated missives to the board, which called him to Raleigh on Thursday for a closed-door meeting.

    Sunderhaus’ point — that doctors need to advise patients to lose weight, because obesity is not just a personal issue, it’s a $147 billion public health crisis — may have gotten lost in the delivery.

    The board, which licenses and disciplines doctors, has not decided whether to charge Sunderhaus over the patient’s complaint. The worst that could happen is that he would lose his license.

    Most problems arising from insensitive comments are handled with a quiet tut-tut by the board – perhaps a recommendation that the practitioner take a refresher course in doctor-patient communication, said Jean Fisher Brinkley, the board’s spokeswoman.

    Usually, doctors appreciate the confidentiality.

    Sunderhaus, by contrast, stormed the beaches in defending his honor.

    Inflammatory letters

    He wrote Gov. Bev Perdue, referring to the patient’s “irresponsible orgasm” that resulted in children whose medical care is provided by Medicaid.

    He fired off numerous letters to the medical board, noting that its rules nauseate him and, among other things, that “the biggest hoax on mankind” is the Drug Enforcement Administration.

    Sunderhaus notified The News & Observer that he was about to be “screwed” by the medical board. He admitted he told the patient that thick eyeglasses would not cause her to go blind “but her thick thighs and diabetes would.”

    “I poked her thigh to emphasize that diabetes is the leading cause of blindness,” he said Thursday. “People have got to accept criticism without getting their bowels in an uproar.”

    Sunderhaus, a trim man who appeared before the board wearing cargo pants and sporting a backpack, makes no apologies for his actions. He blew off a psychiatric test that the board arranged, and he flouted protocol by talking about his case, which the board would like to keep secret.

    At the end of a conversation with this reporter, Sunderhaus offered $20 for her efforts. She returned it, but not before he tucked it in her sweater.

    After 30 years of practice, Sunderhaus said, he is prepared to take whatever discipline the board issues, even the loss of his license.

    “I’m 77,” he said. “I can tell them to stick the darn thing.”

    savery@newsobserver.com or 919-829-4882

    1. This dude is AWESOME. I want him to yell at me about something.

      1. Irresponsible orgasm?

        That’s gold Jerry! Gold!

      2. I’m lucky enough to live in Raleigh. When he comes back want me to give him your number?

    2. Sunderhaus 2012…

      1. His vice president can be that guy that yelled at that little kid for wanting to raise taxes to pay the librarians’ salaries. Xenos or whatever that guy’s name is.

    3. This doctor rules. More people should be like him.

    4. I did the Google immediately after reading that. Dr. Sunderhaus is my new absolute favorite person of the moment.

      http://www.charlotteobserver.c…..65861.html

      Also…
      He fired off numerous letters to the medical board, noting that its rules make him nauseous and, among other things, that “the biggest hoax on mankind” is the Drug Enforcement Administration.

      1. I think I’m in love.

  31. Silly Millenials and their misplaced contempt for privacy.

    Janelle Treibitz
    Puppet Underground
    3168 17th St NW
    Washington, DC 20010
    phone: (646) 734-6705
    email: janelleboal@aol.com

    1. err i guess that should read anonymity. I’m the one with contempt for privacy right now. Oh well.

      1. ska, your earlier mention of a note left at her table left me semi-rigid, but your posting of this information makes me fully tumescent.

        1. As frightening as that sounds I’ll still reply: skr is a different poster than me. You can thank him/her as you go off to your bunk.

          1. Forgive the mistake. For what its worth, you sometimes give me that engorged feeling too.

    2. If I were a lawyer, I’d offer to take this case pro bono for the hospital. Try getting any sort of job involving money after you have a conviction for theft dear.

    3. Looks like she is qualified for a career as a meat puppet.

      http://www.newtactics.org/en/b…..e-treibitz

      1. Q. Please tell me, Janelle Treibitz, how did you come to puppets?

        J. T.: I have always cared about social justice issues and people. I attribute some of it to judaism and the way I was raised as a Jew, to my synagogue and to my parents teaching me to question, and make opinions for myself.

        Can I use the word cunt here?

        1. If I were of the Hebrew extraction*, I would be mighty pissed to see three thousand plus years of rabbinical teachings and theology reduced to this kind of retarded hippie crap.

          * Joseph Epstein once wrote that was a phrase graced upon him by his drill sergeant in a Biloxi boot camp if I’m recalling it correctly.

    4. She uses an AOL email account.

      That right there tells me everything I need to know.

    1. well at least she’s ugly. got that going for her.

    2. She is mighty busted up for 28. Just on the pictures, I’d peg her as at least 40.

      1. You’d peg her? You are a sick mother fucker.

    3. Kyle has offered up “vapid cunt”.

      And I have offered “self-centered twat”.

      But I think this photo deserves a new caption contest utilizing as many slang forms for vagina as possible.

      1. Air-pie.

    4. I can’t tell from the picture, but don’t leeches typically have those inward-facing, razor sharp teeth?

      She does look ready to latch on, though.

    5. 1. Debt
      2. War
      3. Profit

      Good god the’ve solved the riddle!

    6. Oh fuck, that picture pissed me off. Most people don’t have time to protest because they…like.. have fucking jobs and kids, and try to pay their fucking bills.

      1. The wonderous irony is that if she didn’t have Daddy’s wealth as her safety valve, she would probably spend her time actually working real jobs and trying to progress her status in life in order to make it in the real world. All (or at least a great many) of these professional protestors are simply the over-priviledged heirs and heiresses to fotunes. If only these rich folk would promise not to bequeth their hard-earned labor to their ingrateful and antogonistic progeny.

    7. I always said I would be willing to lower my standards to take a chick with a big bank account. But wow, even I am not that greedy.

    8. Or dear lord. You know those three went and had a Fisting Fiesta after they marched for the good of mankind.

  32. Someone actually interviewed her.

    http://www.newtactics.org/en/b…..e-treibitz

  33. Q. Where does the term “puppetista” come from?


    J.T.: Puppettistas are a newer generation of puppeteers. The term puppetista comes from Brasil and implies the use of puppetry with a political end in mind. The shows don’t necessarily have to be political, but the puppet making itself is a political act. The way that you do it is in line with your values. Puppetistas typically use trash. In using trash, we avoid using up a lot of things, and avoid toxic materials. There is also a consciousness about using materials from the place where you are. Bread and Puppet, for instance, has borrowed a number of things from puppetistas. The use of inner tubes from bicycle tires in puppet making comes from puppetistas. There is a lot of give and take from older traditions of radical puppeteers.

    What the cock?

    1. At least she’s proud of making every anti-war protest into a farce.

    2. radical puppeteers.

      Uh, well it’s… you see, what she means is… OK, it’s just that I…

      What the cock?

    3. So her puppets stink?

    4. How on earth did antiwar protesters and/or leftist types seize on friggin’ PUPPETS as a means of protest? Do they not realize how much it makes them seem like out of touch idiots?

      Ooh, a puppet! I am overwhelmed by your reasoning!

    5. Um, wouldn’t digging through trash actually make it MORE likely that you would come into contact with toxic materials?

  34. Freaking neo-hippies, man. At least slackers don’t act all self-righteous.

  35. Oh yes, that long tradition of radical puppeteering, all the way back to when Benjamin Franklin and Samual Adams were making those giant foam heads of George III.

    1. “Penny for the Guy.”

  36. The constant protests against the wars since January must really be stretching their garbage puppet skills to the very limit. Weekend after weekend on the ground in Washington, D.C. filling The Mall with invective against the continued deployment of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq… how do they keep up this monstrous pace?

    1. CHICKENHAWK!!!

      Oh, wait…

  37. Banner morning here at H&R when you see a good Friday Funny, an end the WoD post, and this humdinger of a Bailey rant.

    1. wait till you see the AGW stuff

  38. You have to remember that people who stumble into large sums of money have no clue how money is actually made. Since they don’t know any better and are too insolated to learn, they figure everyone must have gotten their money so easily. This is why entertainers tend to be leftists. I mean if you are making millions for doing something you would do for free or for having a pretty face, you really don’t develop much of an appreciation for how hard the rest of the world has to work to make money.

    This girl no doubt honestly believes that businesses print their own money and that everyone should have things as easy as she does. And if they don’t, it is because some greedy capitalist stole it. Being born wealthy or coming easily into a lot of wealth, can very easily warp your perception of the world.

    1. and this would be why inner suburbs vote more dem (raised as silver spoons) opposed to outer suburbs that vote more republican (made up of monstly first generation college students and small business owners born into modest means who really had to work for their money).

    2. i wish i had seen this before i wrote my comment. you said it better than i.

    3. and good point about entertainers. celebs are essentially lottery winners. they maintain they’re place by seeking the approval; not necessarily of their product but of their personalities. that tends to grant a very skewed idea of how the world works.

      for them, the key to helping poor and disenfracnhised people isn’t in helping them become more productive and self-sufficient. it’s getting people to “care” more.

    4. I’m not so sure you’re right about actors, though. I’ve been in the theater biz myself and it’s not as easy as it looks. Even being a model takes intense physical effort to maintain that pretty face (and all the other pretty bits).

      1. it’s not that entertainers don’t work hard. i’m sure some work as hard and took as many risks as any successful entrepreneur.

        the difference is that entertainers make their money by being liked. that happens in other businesses as well, but not to the same degree.

  39. The hospital should send its collections department after her finger.

  40. there’s a lot of vitriol against this puppet girl; maybe it’s justified. she did steal a couple of hundred dollars and openly muse over whether it was OK. personally, though, i wonder about her parents. this is the problem with a country like ours. people work very hard to establish themselves, and then do everything they can to shelter their children from the realities of life. those children, in turn, often end up as super-entitled or psuedo-revolutionaries.

    do yourselves and our country a huge favor: give your kids a solid understanding in how wealth is created.

    1. Exactly. If the parents hadn’t given her an absorbinant amount of money for free – no strings attached – she wouldn’t have had to reject it.

      Also, somewhere along the line she would have had a job.

      Of course, she has SS and Medicare coming in 30 years, if her poverty doens’t put her on those dockets already, so why does she need a job or money?

    2. I agree with you about parents. Since money doesn’t come for free, a lot of successful parents don’t bother to raise their children. They are too busy out working making all that money. That means their kids are left to the influence of lefty teachers. That combined with a healthy dose of guilt and “why do mommy and daddy love their business more than me” can combine to create a seriously twisted view of the world.

    3. i in no means grew up poor, but my parents were not loaded either… drove used cards, I went to public school and so on. But I can remeber as far back as I can remeber my dad going on about “nothing is free in life… you need to work, save, and invest.” When it came to college they said “we’ll help you out but we arent remortgaging our house for you” so I worked part time, took out loans and so on. It pissed me off in college when the pretentious loaded yuppies were tyring to get the school to convert to all green energy which would have raised out tuition billed by $500 per year. I’m thinking to myself, “you moralistic bastards… some of us are actually paying those bills ourselves!”

      1. drove used cards
        Damn. That is poor.

    4. Bullshit

    5. A Google search turns up the website for Daddy’s forensic animation company, Z-Axis.

      Among other things, they were involved in the litigation against “Big Tobacco.”

      1. So her parents got rich by stealing. Now it all makes sense.

  41. It’s selfish and incredibly vain to run out on a hospital bill because you can’t face your parents. Get over your goddam self already.

    1. Well, after mommy and daddy wouldn’t pay for here Master’s degree in puppetism, she didn’t want them in her life any more.

      Until the will is read, of course.

  42. This year, the Council on Foundations started a Next Generation task force to explore ways to support young philanthropists.

    Forget stealing an x-ray from a hospital. The money and grants that this task force will steer to these poor young rich folk will dwarf the couple of hundred this chick skipped out on.

    Why do you even need a task force to come up with a way to fund young philanthropists? How about, “Hey, you are loaded. Pay your own bills.”?

    1. ummm – I took “support” to mean “help young people who have lots of money become philanthropists”, as in teach them how to handle/invest/give lots of money responsibly. Not give them even more money….

      1. I can see your point, but I still think I’d wager against your interpretation.

        I’m not saying that they will give the kids the money directly. That would be too gauche even for these whiners.

        No instead the task force will need to get some money to rent office space. Then they will hire a bunch of staff workers to turn out all sorts of policy papers and what not.

        Why spend their own money when they can get a grant from the government?

  43. Banner morning here at H&R when you see a good Friday Funny, an end the WoD post, and this humdinger of a Bailey rant.

    I’m surely Radley’s gonna come by anytime now with a nut-punch story of dunbass cops, crooked DAs, and an innocent person serving 20 years.

    1. Yeah, I am sure has a good “and then the cop shot the old man’s dog and only companion” story to make all of our days.

  44. If she were my daughter, I’d gladly make a lump sum cash payment have her change her last name and disavow any knowledge of me.

  45. THREADJACK!!
    Have you seen this Ronald?
    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/n…..l-warming/

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/200…..-released/

    Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..

    1. love Delingpole.

      1. Unfucking believable. Any direct connection to US scientists? This is RICO worthy.

  46. Corporate CEO: part time waitress / ‘puppetista’
    Lawyer: ‘non-profit administrator’ for CISPES
    Partner at KPMG: ‘nonprofit development associate’

    Dear Treibitz, Stansbury and Goldberg families:

    Congrats on your impressive genetic progress. We eagerly await your next generation!

    Sincerely,

    International Brotherhood of Carnival Laborers
    National Association of Truck Stop Prostitutes
    ACORN

    1. Regression to the mean with extreme prejudice :).

  47. This is a ridiculous amount of outrage over a twit and $500.

    1. Tipping point friend. Sometimes it just takes one little thing and everyone goes. Plus it’s Friday. Blowing off a bit of steam at the end of the week.

    2. Yes, but she does personify the ultimate douche bag, who mocks you with her wealth and her near infinite ability to not produce a single thing of value in her entire life, while sponging off all of us for support.

      She deserves as much scorn as can be heaped upon her bony ass.

    3. She is representative of the class of people the Congress and Administration in whose name they are preparing to rape the health care sector for. By herself she is a petty annoyance, but she is Legion, and therefore looms large.

  48. “It annoys me that when someone’s wealth can come from the sheer luck of having the right parents that person’s claim to that wealth is still justified on the premise that wealth is the product of hard work and determination. ”

    More brilliance from Tony, who conveniently leaves out the idle rich liberal politicians he orally gratifies.

    1. I pay him for that.

  49. I’ll also add that, objectively speaking $200-$300 is a TOTALLY FUCKING REASONABLE price to pay for an emergency room visit.

    Fuck people who whine about a $300 price tag for emergency room visitation either didn’t think it was really an “emergency”, or are entitled little assholes. They probably spend more money maintaining their cars, then bitch that they have to couch up a couple hundred bucks for their own personal health in a supposed emergency.

    Fuck those people who think it’s too expensive to pay out of pocket.

    1. I should also add: Do you really need a fucking X-ray for a broken finger? Does X-raying the finger make any difference to what you’re going to do? Just slap a splint on it and prescribe some pain killers. Fuck.

      Not only is she an entitled little bitch, she’s stealing services that probably aren’t even medically necessary.

      1. Note that didn’t do anything to her. It was probably a hair line crack that couldn’t be treated anyway.

        1. She probably just went for the pain-killers.

          But the X-ray was medical malpractice CYA. It she had a protruding bone splinter or leaking marrow fat that could block an artery or vein, she could sue big time and make giant puppets forever.

          1. I wonder how that would play out in court.
            “Your honor, I lied on the forms and gave them a fake name so I could steal $300 in emergency room services that my parents could have paid for, but they didn’t give me an X-ray! Those bastards!”

            1. Well, she lied because of their negligent treatment. If they were going to be that caviler about her health, she didn’t trust them with her personal information.

              I realized long ago that I should have been a ambulance chaser.

      2. For that matter, what kind of pussy goes to the ER for a broken finger?

      3. yes, yes, and fuck yes.

  50. Oh, also, here’s the website for Resource Generation the organization mentioned in the original blog post.

  51. Oh for fuck’s sake, this woman went to NYU too… I bet she was one of those dipshits who spent half their week outside the library protesting tuition increases. God I hated those people… Some of them wore rat-suits, for reasons never quite clear to me.

  52. I’d also like to note:

    ARMPIT!! (from her FB page)

  53. Not taking money from parents: +10
    Pulling the fake name stunt to get out of responsibility anyway? -1500

  54. Hey, she had a broken finger. How much can it really cost? 20 times what it should cost.

    I see nothing wrong with what she did.

    Reminds me of a Dave Chappelle episode, where he offered a clever solution to the american healthcare problem…get a phony canadian ID card.

    1. Why did it cost 20 times what it should have? Bullshit. She went to an emergency room and was seen by people who are paid good money for what they do. Further, even if it was too expensive, maybe one of the reasons why it is is because the people who pay have to subsidize all the people who dont?

    2. Alice, c’mon dude… wtf.

      1. I agree that health care is too expensive in general, but I’ve explained to you a bazillion times WHY this is the case, and it doesn’t have all that much to do with insurance company “greed”…
      2. $200 is unreasonable for an emergency room X-Ray?? REALLY?

      According to you it should be $10.00?

      On any scale that’s insane. These resources are finite dude, there aren’t an infinite number of X-Ray machines, X-Ray machine techs or even protective lead vests out there. Suggesting it should have been $10, is suggesting that the resources, time & training exist on the same scale as a dinner for two at Burger King. REALLY!??

      Does that honestly seem remotely sane to you?

      3. All she’s done is increase the overall burden to those who can’t pay. Someone who really couldn’t afford it will now be denied some level of care in the future because the hospital is too busy paying for people like this bitch. As a result, the hospital has to either fill out some kind of insurance/government paper work reflecting the fraud and trying to recoup a stupid $200 expense, or they have to raise their rates across the board to cover these kinds of losses.

      EVERYBODY LOSES THIS WAY!

      Everybody.

      All this idiot has done is make health care resources more expensive, harder to access, and cost a bunch of people time that they can never get back having to deal with her childish, entitlement bullshit.

      Now consider that she’s not exactly the only person who does this kind of thing. What’s even more embarrassingly stupid is that her dad, the successful businessman, is likely a net-tax payer, so while she’s not ok with taking his money *directly*, she’s obviously perfectly cool with raising taxes on him significantly to pay for her medical care indirectly. What’s even worse still is that when she could have just been like “hey dad, I need $200 cause I broke my finger, can you help me out” – which would have been an opportunity for family bonding, honesty and voluntary charity costing ONLY $200 – her burdening other people through her fraud will cost significantly more than that and offers no additional social/community benefit. Ultimately, if people realize they’re being defrauded like this, it results in harm to the community as people start to resent being made to pay for selfish cunts like her.

      1. As I was saying above, people spend as much maintaining their cars.

        I spent about $300 in the past few months on repairs and maintainance. Claming that it should be cheaper than that for basic repairs and maintenance to YOUR BODY is fucking retarded.

        $300 for an emergency room visit is astonishingly cheap considering the typical wages of the doctors and nurses involved. Not to mention lab technicians and equipment. If I really had an emergency I wouldn’t balk at $1,000, even. People spend that much on flat screen HDTVs. Jesus.

    3. Yeah, maintenance of x-ray machines is free, and the technicians that run them are volunteers, and I’m sure when new and better technology comes out, they’ll get a brand new x-ray machine donated to them and won’t cost a dime. Dumbass.

    4. If she thought that $309 was too much to pay for her broken finger, then how much of an emergency was it really?

    5. I see nothing wrong with what she did

      Yes you do, you’re just lying. You’d cry like a little bitch if someone stole from you.

  55. Her parents should pay that hospital bill out of spite to her.

  56. Those of us with wealth and progressive values resist the privilege and actually deny it because of this inequality that exists in society. We’re not going to accept that form of privilege. But when it comes to [my son’s] health care, we’re not going to mess around.

    Most recently, [I required] an MRI, and I can’t afford it on my own, so I am forced to rely on my parents. I think of myself as independent, but I am not able to reconcile that payment.

    Stansbury vents about politics and critiques his inheritance, which he says perpetuates social inequalities and what he views as an insulated upper class. (He supports increasing estate and capital gains taxes.) … Now that he has a child, Stansbury said he can no longer view his inheritance as a pot of money to be donated to causes.

    I DON’T THINK YOU PEOPLE BELIEVE WHAT YOU THINK YOU BELIEVE.

    Litmus test: If you don’t believe in inheritance, dispose of the inheritance immediately (irrevocable living charitable trust, donation to charity, trash can). Anything else means you feel some entitlement to the money for either leisure or insurance against accepting a lower standard of living, extraordinary luxuries that do not exist for most people. Pretending to care just makes you more of a jackass.

    There’s also something uniquely pathetic about 30-some-year-olds stuck in the undergrad stage of development where they reject the wealth of this world so long as they can hit up the clubz on the weekend. Or maybe it’s the wealthy version of “Man, fuck my parents. I’ll show them when I move out of the basement and make it on my own.”

    1. Inheritance and privilege is wrong, but I am still going to make sure my inheritance goes to benefit my son. But of course I will make up for that trying to get the government to ensure that no one else’s child gets the same benefit.

      These people need to be shot. Seriously, I am tired of them breathing my air.

      1. You might be on to something. By breathing air and exhaling carbon dioxide, they are leading to the destruction of earth. The only moral option is suicide.

      2. Plus, they have organs that could be used for actual humans.

  57. Shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in action.

  58. It is possible she didn’t want to accept a gift of money from her parents, but there is no reason she could not have accepted a loan from them and paid them back.

    I have used “the Bank of Mom and Dad” at several times in my life. And paid them back, too. (Easy terms and very low interest rate were an advantage.)

  59. Now that I think about it, a similar thing happened to me while I was in college. I got hurt and needed 14 stitches to close the gash in my leg. Cost over 150 early-80s-dollars. I didn’t have insurance OR a rich daddy, but I did have a credit card. It took me several months to pay off the card, but I didn’t just give them a fake name and walk away. Anybody wanna bet she has a credit card she could have used?

    1. Even in ’80s dollars, $150 isn’t that much.

      Why even bother getting insurance for shit like that?
      No wonder HSAs are so popular.

      Who runs around whining “Waaa! mommy! I don’t want spend more that a $10.00 co-pay on my blood spurting leg gash! Waaaa!” ????

      WTF? People today are fucking pussies.
      Co-pays should be $100.00 minimum.

      1. I love you, Hazel…

    2. When my wife and I were first married, we were flat broke a lot of the time. We couldn’t even afford to go to the $1 movies. As a result of our alternative entertainment we ended up having a daughter with no insurance.

      We found a program at the local teaching hospital where we got all the normal pre-natal stuff at big discounts because we used trainee docs. We also worked out a payment plan with the hospital.

      The trainee docs were pretty good. I don’t think they were any worse than the fancy docs we got when my sons came along later when we had insurance.

  60. it’s probably been said, but if you steal services because you don’t have the cash or don’t want your parents cash, you don’t really have time to volunteer with the Puppet Underground performance group, which raises money for grass-roots organizations.

  61. You know those three went and had a Fisting Fiesta after they marched for the good of mankind.

    Maybe that’s how she broke her finger.

  62. WHAT?!?! DON’T YOU PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT SHE HAS A *RIGHT* TO THOSE XRAYS?!@

    SEE, THIS IS EXACTLY WHY WE NEED SINGLE PAYER HEALTHCARE, BECAUSE NOBODY SHOULD HAVE TO CHOOSE BETWEEN TAKING MONEY FROM THEIR PARENTS OR NOT GETTING AN X-RAY!

  63. im 26, financially independent of my parents, and yet i still ask them for money every time i see them. not because i need it, but because they have more than i do, and they are willing to give it to me.

    am i a spoiled brat? possibly.
    do i love my parents? definitely.

    1. Seriously? Don’t you have any, you know, pride or dignity?
      I mean, if my parents Offer me money, sure, I’ll take it, but I don’t ask for it unless I really, really need it, and that hasn’t happened in quite a while.
      I feel better about myself as a result.

  64. I’ve only read about half the thread, so sorry if I’m beating a dead horse with my cock, but WHO THE FUCK NEEDS AN EMERGENCY ROOM VISIT FOR A BROKEN FINGER?!?

    NOW–if it’s going through the skin like that dude’s shin in Bloodsport…I’ll give her that.

    I’ve broken at least 8 of my fingers and I only went to the doctor once, and that was only because I was 10 and it wasn’t my call.

    Fucking man up, put some tape on it and deal. No one appreciates pain anymore.

    1. My wife who works in an emergency room brought home a term popular with her co-workers: M.A.D. or “Microsoft Affective Disorder”.

      Here in Seattle, you get a lot of wealthy yuppies in the E.R. (yes, let that soak in a moment– in the fucking E.R.) because of stuff like… the sniffles, or a cold, or a fever which is running at a dizzying 99.4. After being told to go home, drink plenty of fluids, they return the next day reporting that they don’t feel much better.

      I broke a foot, and two fingers and never saw a dr. (and yes, I have health insurance) Unless the bone is displaced, wrap it, take an ibuprofen, and remember not to run barefoot in the house when the lights are off.

  65. She shoulda just got a puppet x-ray. Those are way cheap cuz they’re made from trash & stuff.

  66. You guys throw the comment parties at the weirdest times. Well, this should be easy to cycle away and roll your eyes if you only recall a simple sentence or two.

    To paraphrase,

    “Don’t envy those who inherit their wealth if they are unworthy of it, it will surely destroy them.”

    That’s actually one of my favorite Randisms, along with one of her lines from her plays. Eventhough the article isn’t a perfect match for this quote, i think it still applies.

    1. When you find the envy in any of these comments, be sure to let us know.

      1. Sigh, all caps so you get it, ok tard.

        THE INHERITANCE DESTROYED HERE

        Uhm hello

        1. that should be HER, I’m blaming that on you. Your obtuseness blinded me.

          1. Aw, isn’t that cute. The house mongoloid is taunting me.

            [pats it on the head]

            Buh bye troll.

  67. You can make a puppet finger X-ray machine out of a Kodak Brownie and a radium-dial watch.

  68. Shit. I actually had to work today and you guys start the party early. Well, y’all have covered the needed abuse and vituperation nicely, I’ll just go back to work now, thanks.

  69. I really must return to my earlier comment of the strangest comment parties. After wading through the bankruptcy threadjack, and the tons of misogny. I’m wondering what are the emotions at work as you all scramble to heap ridicule and disdain upon this upper crust hippy.

    As you battle your demons, and pour out your anger, remember this, if this exact same person had gotten a million dollar job through embracing her familial connections, you’d all be claiming she was talented. Just something to think about as you bitch and moan your lives away. Thank you, seriously, your employer’s sacrifice(time theft) is the world’s gain.

    1. Ooh, you’re so ancient and wise.

  70. maybe someone should forward these comments to her parents. I mean you found an email for her so easily.

  71. Well, um, in that case why don’t we take the phrase, “vapid cunt” and we tweak it, you know, just a hair, to something like, what, like
    “a dewy meadow”?

  72. if this exact same person had gotten a million dollar job through embracing her familial connections, you’d all be claiming she was talented.

    No, if she’d gotten a million dollar job as a puppettista, I’d still think she was a useless drone. But I’d be impressed she could make a million bucks from puppets. I would’ve thought the Henson Company had the market locked up.

  73. People just don’t understand the kind of pressures that $20 million dollars can bring down on a person…

  74. from what I am told it’s really just the first million that’s hard.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.