Here are today links:
Great set of charts showing damage caused by the financial meltdown (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities) (My post on this earlier today)
Refusing to submit to the U.S. News and World Report rankings results in improved performance (The Atlantic)
The two mosques that already exist near ground zero - 4 and 12 blocks away (NYT) (My post on this earlier today)
That's right, we pretty much disapprove of everybody (PPP)
How not to write news analysis (Jonathan Bernstein)
The problem with the deficit hawk - funny (Economist's View)
How UBS made out with Walmart using satellite technology - cool (CNBC)
You have to be kidding me...
OK, I find the NYC Mosque controversy offensive. My position was very well stated by Obama on Friday night (I didn't appreciate his walk-back on Saturday morning). Jon Stewart did a great job of presenting how ridiculous this issue is in one of last week's daily shows (the clip I liked is here).
OK, now the compromise position, which I disagree with, is for the builders of the mosque to back down and move the mosque to some other part of the city. Somewhere... "less sensitive". Let;'s pretend that isn't a violation of their basic constitutional rights. Let's look at how far away we're talking about. A compromise can't be that bad, right? As has been well reported, the build site for the planned mosque is two blocks away from ground zero. So, how far away are other mosques in the city (NYT link)?
So there is an existing mosque that is FOUR blocks away from ground zero.
This controversy is pure political demagoguery appealing to the worst (racist) instincts of people. Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrinch and all the others involved in this should bow their heads in shame and apologize for being so offensive. And so unbelievably wrong.
OK, venting over. Back to financial models.
OK, now the compromise position, which I disagree with, is for the builders of the mosque to back down and move the mosque to some other part of the city. Somewhere... "less sensitive". Let;'s pretend that isn't a violation of their basic constitutional rights. Let's look at how far away we're talking about. A compromise can't be that bad, right? As has been well reported, the build site for the planned mosque is two blocks away from ground zero. So, how far away are other mosques in the city (NYT link)?
Masjid Manhattan, on Warren Street, four blocks from ground zero, was founded in 1970. Masjid al-Farah, formerly on Mercer Street, moved to its present location on West Broadway, about 12 blocks from ground zero, in 1985. Both mosques — essentially one-room operations — routinely turn people away for lack of space.
So there is an existing mosque that is FOUR blocks away from ground zero.
This controversy is pure political demagoguery appealing to the worst (racist) instincts of people. Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrinch and all the others involved in this should bow their heads in shame and apologize for being so offensive. And so unbelievably wrong.
OK, venting over. Back to financial models.
Fun With Charts
Brad DeLong's twitter feed just brought me to an excellent set of charts showing the last two years of our economic disaster. Basically, this is chart porn. If you love economic charts, you need to check this out.
Below are a few samples. Clink on the link for more.
Below are a few samples. Clink on the link for more.
8/17/10 Links
This is a light link day. I just didn't have the information grazing need that usually carries me through the day. That said, here are a few goodies...
Barry Ritholtz on how we should have rescued the financial system (The Big Picture)
Policy positions are largely irrelevant in US elections (Ezra Klein)
Why sometimes it doesn't make sense to buy and hold (Pragmatic Capitalism)
I'm getting old (Beloit College)
Barry Ritholtz on how we should have rescued the financial system (The Big Picture)
Policy positions are largely irrelevant in US elections (Ezra Klein)
Why sometimes it doesn't make sense to buy and hold (Pragmatic Capitalism)
I'm getting old (Beloit College)
8/16/10 Links
Here's what I'm into today.
Palin supporters must be high (PPP)
One of the rare moments I find myself agreeing with an NRO blogger (The Agenda)
How long do you think the jobs recession will last? (Robert Reich)
Having a dog makes you more cooperative (Economist)
How to keep a politically useful story alive (David Weigel)
Can the GOP keep the lid on? (Mark Halperin)
The NYT isn't satisfied with the internet (Media Decoder)
Don't you just love a good burger? (DCist)
No conflict of interest to see here (Think Progress)
Story of a video game virgin (kottke.org)
When the end of world was here, was Bush or Obama president? Seriously. (PewResearchCenter)
Worst news of the day. Stupid. (Washington Post)
Palin supporters must be high (PPP)
One of the rare moments I find myself agreeing with an NRO blogger (The Agenda)
How long do you think the jobs recession will last? (Robert Reich)
Having a dog makes you more cooperative (Economist)
How to keep a politically useful story alive (David Weigel)
Can the GOP keep the lid on? (Mark Halperin)
The NYT isn't satisfied with the internet (Media Decoder)
Don't you just love a good burger? (DCist)
No conflict of interest to see here (Think Progress)
Story of a video game virgin (kottke.org)
When the end of world was here, was Bush or Obama president? Seriously. (PewResearchCenter)
Worst news of the day. Stupid. (Washington Post)
Today's Links
This is really just a reaction to posting 42 links yesterday. I'm pretty sure that there is no way anybody hit even one of those links. This is a much smaller set so maybe you'll find one or two things here that you find promising.
My toddler isn't a bully. Your's is just a whimpering little social parasite.
Repeat after me: There are only two parties that matter, there are only two parties that matter
Being against the mosque, you know, because of the holy war
Why the Biden/Hillary talk represents journalistic laziness
Paul Ryan is not being persecuted by the MSM
Perhaps the Senate does suck
I'm in the minority (nothing new)
Next, I think we'll move from the water to sparkling water
Have a great weekend!
My toddler isn't a bully. Your's is just a whimpering little social parasite.
Repeat after me: There are only two parties that matter, there are only two parties that matter
Being against the mosque, you know, because of the holy war
Why the Biden/Hillary talk represents journalistic laziness
Paul Ryan is not being persecuted by the MSM
Perhaps the Senate does suck
I'm in the minority (nothing new)
Next, I think we'll move from the water to sparkling water
Have a great weekend!
Jon Stewart's Take On Religious Tolerance
Funny and painful. You know, the way Stewart is when he's completely right.
Link to 1st amendment
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Municipal Land-Use Hearing Update | ||||
| ||||
Link to 1st amendment
Friday Linkage - On Thursday!
My twitter feed went crazy this week so I'm doing this post a day earlier than last week. I'm considering doing a link post like this every time I have between 10 and 15 links. Otherwise, the list gets way too long. (I know, 42 links is too many).
With that said, Links:
Men, you should wear red
Where Krugman explains how to read a report from the CBO
Crist benefited from the oil spill
A conservative evaluating his position against same-sex marriage
A political blog recommended by Chuck Todd
Mark Thoma on the weakness in last Friday's (8-6-10) job report
Part of the reason the administration didn't push for a larger stimulus package in 2009
It's been hot this year
A thawing glacier
Yuck. Just yuck.
How many chargers do you have?
Economists call each other names, too
Where Coke says that no reasonable person would think that vitamin water is a healthy beverage
Where Nate Silver agrees with Paul Krugman that Paul Ryan is full of it
How large is the beauty premium for prostitutes?
A poll that asks if the oil spill was a good thing
Obama phones? Bush phones?
Fiscal enemy number one: Public employees
Great chart showing how incomes dropped in 2009
Convincing secular arguments against same-sex marriage are hard to make
Bell. The purest case of government employee theft from the taxpayers that I have ever read.
Palin's eye-roll (old news, admit-ably)
Video games - from geek to jock
What kind of unemployment do we have, structural, frictional, or cyclical? Does it matter?
Conservapedia is the best!
Mmm, state fair food (check out the pictures)
The origin of Mexico's drug war
Should government do more or less? What do independent voters think today?
Maybe, Palin pissed off the people of Alaska when she stepped down
When reality becomes unhinged, who will even notice?
The pension crisis is the fault of overly-optimistic economists (So much for the dismal science)
When the trade deficit ends, how much will it suck?
Political considerations in the recently passed $26 billion aid package to states.
How do you spell, shcool?
Being 'concerned' about social security, improves your credibility
Where we learn that the U.S. is bankrupt
Negative TIPS yields. Whoa.
Car shopping in the internet age
Without this jobs program, unemployment wouldn't be 9.5%, it would be 11.5%
Where Paul Krugman 'solves' the deficit problem
Same-sex couples should be able to marry again next Wednesday
Paul Ryan is entirely clear despite what his critics say
With that said, Links:
Men, you should wear red
Where Krugman explains how to read a report from the CBO
Crist benefited from the oil spill
A conservative evaluating his position against same-sex marriage
A political blog recommended by Chuck Todd
Mark Thoma on the weakness in last Friday's (8-6-10) job report
Part of the reason the administration didn't push for a larger stimulus package in 2009
It's been hot this year
A thawing glacier
Yuck. Just yuck.
How many chargers do you have?
Economists call each other names, too
Where Coke says that no reasonable person would think that vitamin water is a healthy beverage
Where Nate Silver agrees with Paul Krugman that Paul Ryan is full of it
How large is the beauty premium for prostitutes?
A poll that asks if the oil spill was a good thing
Obama phones? Bush phones?
Fiscal enemy number one: Public employees
Great chart showing how incomes dropped in 2009
Convincing secular arguments against same-sex marriage are hard to make
Bell. The purest case of government employee theft from the taxpayers that I have ever read.
Palin's eye-roll (old news, admit-ably)
Video games - from geek to jock
What kind of unemployment do we have, structural, frictional, or cyclical? Does it matter?
Conservapedia is the best!
Mmm, state fair food (check out the pictures)
The origin of Mexico's drug war
Should government do more or less? What do independent voters think today?
Maybe, Palin pissed off the people of Alaska when she stepped down
When reality becomes unhinged, who will even notice?
The pension crisis is the fault of overly-optimistic economists (So much for the dismal science)
When the trade deficit ends, how much will it suck?
Political considerations in the recently passed $26 billion aid package to states.
How do you spell, shcool?
Being 'concerned' about social security, improves your credibility
Where we learn that the U.S. is bankrupt
Negative TIPS yields. Whoa.
Car shopping in the internet age
Without this jobs program, unemployment wouldn't be 9.5%, it would be 11.5%
Where Paul Krugman 'solves' the deficit problem
Same-sex couples should be able to marry again next Wednesday
Paul Ryan is entirely clear despite what his critics say
The Non-Recovery
Ezra gets depressed (link):
If states have to cut $120 billion from their budgets, that money -- and the things it does -- will just leave the economy. There will be fewer jobs, higher taxes, less financial aid. None of that is speculative. There's no theory in which it doesn't happen. This is a large economic contraction that we've decided to allow, because we would prefer to allow it than to put down the money -- much less money, incidentally, than it will cost to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich -- necessary to prevent it.
Of everything that's happened since the financial crisis, this is, to me, the most frustrating. It is a decision we, as a polity, are making to prolong our economic pain and slow our economic recovery. It is needless and senseless and largely the result of political, rather than economic, disagreement. And when it happens, we will all look around at one another and lament our slow recovery, and our terrible economy, and our inept political leaders, who have clearly done something wrong, even if we're not sure exactly what.
How Much Would It Hurt To Be Specific?
Just a quicky post linking to something from Yglesias' blog (link). Here's the key quote:
This fits in very nicely with my complete disdain for the Tea Party/GOP. When pressed, the answer seems to be, "We'll figure out the spending cuts, so can I have my tax cut now, please?" The weighty manner in which the government deficit is discussed is a front. We'd see serious answers otherwise. Why be specific and risk ideas being discussed, when my political position is improved by transparent pandering and fear-mongering.
As a side point; I'm with Krugman, Klein, and Silver on how Ryan's blueprint is bogus, with the effect of spending cuts taken credit for but not showing the deficit worsening impact of his tax cuts. But at least, Ryan is showing the government programs he wants to gut (Primarily Medicare). A constitutional balanced budget amendment requiring a super-majority to pass a tax is not only fantasy land (And bad economics), it's also completely disingenuous. But then again, what was I expecting?.
To which I ask, if “the whole idea is to cut spending,” then why not propose spending cuts? It’s a lot easier to pass a budget than to pass a constitutional amendment. Surely, if a majority Americans are clamoring for “robust spending cuts” as DeMint claims, then the GOP would benefit in the midterms by proposing such cuts. Instead, the GOP either cannot or will not propose anything specific; rather, they continue to push for extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy without any spending offsets. That really should end any serious consideration of what this balanced budget amendment is all about.
But the larger point here is that the Republican Party is refusing to detail an actual agenda in advance of the November elections. There are plenty of things a Speaker Boehner really might do if the GOP were to regain the House majority in the fall. But instead of talking about which of those things they’ll attempt, Republican leaders continue to play to their base with notions of ACA repeal and radical changes to the constitution that require 2/3 majorities and approval of 38 states. The answer of the pundit class seems to be to sort of laugh off this talk of amending the constitution since it “won’t happen” — to which the follow-up should be, what will happen if the GOP takes over Congress? Voters should probably hear the answer before going to the polls.
This fits in very nicely with my complete disdain for the Tea Party/GOP. When pressed, the answer seems to be, "We'll figure out the spending cuts, so can I have my tax cut now, please?" The weighty manner in which the government deficit is discussed is a front. We'd see serious answers otherwise. Why be specific and risk ideas being discussed, when my political position is improved by transparent pandering and fear-mongering.
As a side point; I'm with Krugman, Klein, and Silver on how Ryan's blueprint is bogus, with the effect of spending cuts taken credit for but not showing the deficit worsening impact of his tax cuts. But at least, Ryan is showing the government programs he wants to gut (Primarily Medicare). A constitutional balanced budget amendment requiring a super-majority to pass a tax is not only fantasy land (And bad economics), it's also completely disingenuous. But then again, what was I expecting?.
It's Always Darkest When It's Darkest
Call Me Fanboy. Fanboy Wiebe.
I seriously have a man-crush on Paul Krugman. His piece today on Paul Ryan is a complete tear-down of the man's ideas. He uses plenty of facts to back up his argument. And then he rips the news media for treating him seriously. Here's Krugman's close (link):
And you think he's done, right? But wait... Look at the piece below in italics.
I can't say that it was Paul's decision to put that at the end. Maybe it was the NYT just letting us know that Mr. Brooks is off today. But it is at least INTERESTING that Brooks is exactly the person who would praise Ryan.
Ohh, Mr. Krugman. You had me at "One depressing aspect of American politics is the susceptibility of the political and media establishment to charlatans."
So why have so many in Washington, especially in the news media, been taken in by this flimflam? It’s not just inability to do the math, although that’s part of it. There’s also the unwillingness of self-styled centrists to face up to the realities of the modern Republican Party; they want to pretend, in the teeth of overwhelming evidence, that there are still people in the G.O.P. making sense. And last but not least, there’s deference to power — the G.O.P. is a resurgent political force, so one mustn’t point out that its intellectual heroes have no clothes.
But they don’t. The Ryan plan is a fraud that makes no useful contribution to the debate over America’s fiscal future.
And you think he's done, right? But wait... Look at the piece below in italics.
David Brooks is off today.
I can't say that it was Paul's decision to put that at the end. Maybe it was the NYT just letting us know that Mr. Brooks is off today. But it is at least INTERESTING that Brooks is exactly the person who would praise Ryan.
Ohh, Mr. Krugman. You had me at "One depressing aspect of American politics is the susceptibility of the political and media establishment to charlatans."
This Week's Twitter Links
Maybe I can make this into a weekly habit. Below are this week's links (beginning on August 3rd):
Not the best way to run a race
I may not like Ryan's plan, but at least he's talking
Being the head of the federal reserve doesn't make you correct
Do you like Palin's chances?
I said Brown
"Some miracle"
Not the best time to be a homebuilder
Learning from Jose Canseco
Those damned liberal activist judges!
If anything I do makes me unpopular, shouldn't I just do nothing?
Is scientific research wasteful government spending?
Is Iran reaching out?
Because government spending is wasteful. By definition. Right.
Limbaugh says stupid things
Evidence? Who needs evidence when you control the media?
Being for a larger deficit means being against health care policy
Remember those carefree college days?
Not the best way to run a race
I may not like Ryan's plan, but at least he's talking
Being the head of the federal reserve doesn't make you correct
Do you like Palin's chances?
I said Brown
"Some miracle"
Not the best time to be a homebuilder
Learning from Jose Canseco
Those damned liberal activist judges!
If anything I do makes me unpopular, shouldn't I just do nothing?
Is scientific research wasteful government spending?
Is Iran reaching out?
Because government spending is wasteful. By definition. Right.
Limbaugh says stupid things
Evidence? Who needs evidence when you control the media?
Being for a larger deficit means being against health care policy
Remember those carefree college days?
Lunch Break: Sarah Palin's Facebook Page
One thing you may know about Sarah Palin, is how well she has adapted to the new online media (Facebook, Twitter) in order to speak directly to her supporters. I've read some criticism of her approach in that it enables her to dodge tough questions that traditional media outlets would ask (Think Katie Couric: "...what newspapers and magazines did you regularly read before you were tapped for this — to stay informed and to understand the world?"). But, you have to hand it to her as a political figure who 'gets' the new media.
What I didn't have any idea about was the level of screening that goes into her Facebook page. Check this (link) out from John Dickerson in Slate:
10% doesn't seem like a heck of lot to me. What really impressed me were the kind of comments that were edited. Below are couple of interesting one from the article:
The article identifies a few other types of comments that are edited (racial slurs, mean comments, anything about Obama's birth certificate, etc.). Despite the latest 'family crisis', I still believe that she's running in 2012 for president and has as good a chance of any of the potential GOP candidates of winning their nomination. Her ability to work the new media should prove handy in that upcoming battle.
What I didn't have any idea about was the level of screening that goes into her Facebook page. Check this (link) out from John Dickerson in Slate:
How much work does it take to keep everything so sanitized? To help me find out, my colleague Jeremy Singer-Vine wrote a program to capture comments to Palin's page before the clean-up crew could arrive. (Here's an explanation of how Jeremy's program works.) All these posts were initially public, if only for a few minutes. We looked at the comments to 10 Palin posts over 12 days, capturing the deletions in the 24 hours after the posts were live. In that period, a rough average of 10 percent of total posts were deleted.
10% doesn't seem like a heck of lot to me. What really impressed me were the kind of comments that were edited. Below are couple of interesting one from the article:
Polite disagreement. "Sarah, perception is everything! I learned that in the military. All you have to do is disassociate yourself from those Tea Partiers that are indeed racist and the NAACP gones [sic] away," wrote one in response to Palin's post on the NAACP's charge that the Tea Party tolerated racism. "Even they [the NAACP] admit the Tea Party is not a racist organization. Mrs. Palin, I believe you to be an honorable Woman. You believe in your cause. Sometimes for the good of the cause one has to make a stand even to those that support the cause. Remember John Mccain, circa 2008 in which a woman stood up and called Candidate Obama a Muslim. The Honorable John Mccain rebuked her. This could be your moment."
...
Too much agreement. "Do us a favor Sarah, trap a few Wolves and ship em to D.C., they do eat Rats don't they? Have a great trip Sarah, God Bless."
The article identifies a few other types of comments that are edited (racial slurs, mean comments, anything about Obama's birth certificate, etc.). Despite the latest 'family crisis', I still believe that she's running in 2012 for president and has as good a chance of any of the potential GOP candidates of winning their nomination. Her ability to work the new media should prove handy in that upcoming battle.
Dissecting Lies
The GOP/Tea Party line is that: Obama (A socialist) has, much like a dictator, taken a hold of the federal government and massively increased spending. I don't think I'm embellishing. I've heard this repeated by respected members of the GOP, in newspapers, on Fox News, and on right-wing blogs.
Paul Krugman has a fantastic post taking this lie apart (here).
Rather than just cut-and paste the entire blog post, here are a few key charts that really take apart what's going on with government spending.
So, what's going-on here? Simple. We have RECORD unemployment. This isn't a 'government take-over' of the economy. This isn't a massive spending designed to implement an agenda of socialism. I know that I'm supposed to balance my thinking with the idea that my side spreads an equal number of falsehoods. But seriously, the nonsense from the 'ring-wing noise machine' is tedious, loud, and wrong. Here's to Krugman finding another way to point that out. Cheers!
Paul Krugman has a fantastic post taking this lie apart (here).
Rather than just cut-and paste the entire blog post, here are a few key charts that really take apart what's going on with government spending.
So, what's going-on here? Simple. We have RECORD unemployment. This isn't a 'government take-over' of the economy. This isn't a massive spending designed to implement an agenda of socialism. I know that I'm supposed to balance my thinking with the idea that my side spreads an equal number of falsehoods. But seriously, the nonsense from the 'ring-wing noise machine' is tedious, loud, and wrong. Here's to Krugman finding another way to point that out. Cheers!
Some readings from July
Sometime ambition gets the best of me. Weekly just fell away huh? OK... Here's some housekeeping:
A new toy around the house. And yes, it's sweet.
Elizabeth Warren, the debate continues (even now)
Tax cuts do not automatically increase revenue
What are conservatives, now?
Making money by giving it away
The latest, greatest, board games
Long term, this is bad
Getting Krugman to stick a pencil in his eye
Improving GOP outlook in the senate
The shutdown won't happen
Where Kevin Drum reads my mind
How do people in the media keep up with the information flow?
"I'm not aware of any agency with the authority, responsibility or a process in place to coordinate all these interagency and commercial activities. The complexity of this system defies description."
What does BS look like?
Erick Erickson is a blowhard
Making decisions on the margin
If you tell lies often enough, you begin to believe them
The tea party pisses people off
The filibuster is here to stay
Sullivan loves Palin
27,000 abandoned wells not checked for leaks
The pain of Palin
Playing pretend with tax charts
How being liar makes you popular
The economics of Romneycare
Does anybody really care about the deficit?
How to shrink government services
Being on both sides of an argument
If the economy determines electoral outcomes, why was 2000 so close?
But... Does crazy win?
Another Facebook debacle
In case you were wondering, Krugman thinks he's right
I don't like FOX "News"
Great pictures from the war in Afghanistan
GDP. It's worse then we thought
How much does that hurt?
The structure of the conflict matters more than the players
Identifying propaganda (Regarding Bush's tax cuts)
Open source textbooks. What's not to like?
Spin, spin, spin, spin, spin...
How to piss off monkeys
A new toy around the house. And yes, it's sweet.
Elizabeth Warren, the debate continues (even now)
Tax cuts do not automatically increase revenue
What are conservatives, now?
Making money by giving it away
The latest, greatest, board games
Long term, this is bad
Getting Krugman to stick a pencil in his eye
Improving GOP outlook in the senate
The shutdown won't happen
Where Kevin Drum reads my mind
How do people in the media keep up with the information flow?
"I'm not aware of any agency with the authority, responsibility or a process in place to coordinate all these interagency and commercial activities. The complexity of this system defies description."
What does BS look like?
Erick Erickson is a blowhard
Making decisions on the margin
If you tell lies often enough, you begin to believe them
The tea party pisses people off
The filibuster is here to stay
Sullivan loves Palin
27,000 abandoned wells not checked for leaks
The pain of Palin
Playing pretend with tax charts
How being liar makes you popular
The economics of Romneycare
Does anybody really care about the deficit?
How to shrink government services
Being on both sides of an argument
If the economy determines electoral outcomes, why was 2000 so close?
But... Does crazy win?
Another Facebook debacle
In case you were wondering, Krugman thinks he's right
I don't like FOX "News"
Great pictures from the war in Afghanistan
GDP. It's worse then we thought
How much does that hurt?
The structure of the conflict matters more than the players
Identifying propaganda (Regarding Bush's tax cuts)
Open source textbooks. What's not to like?
Spin, spin, spin, spin, spin...
How to piss off monkeys
The Ugly Truth
Ezra Klein nails it on his blog (link).
It's ugly in the sense that policy is irrelevant to the outcome of most elections. I'd really like to believe that this isn't true, and political parties would be rewarded and punished on the basis of the policies that they enacted or blocked. But, as usual, the relationship is much clearer than that. Here's the chart Ezra uses to demonstrate the correlation:
Democrats won their massive majority because of an economic collapse. They've passed so much legislation because they have a massive majority based on an economic collapse. But the economic collapse isn't over. And having a lot more seats than the other party means 1) voters blame you for the condition of the country, and 2) you have a lot of seats to lose. What the bad economy and the huge majority giveth, the bad economy and the huge majority taketh away. Om.
If there's a tension here, it's in the way that public opinions and the system interact -- or, more specifically, the way they don't. You can look at this and ask why Democrats passed all this legislation that made them unpopular. But if Democrats had sat around and done nothing after the stimulus, does anyone think they'd be more popular? On some level, Democrats understand that if people's incomes had gone up over the last year, their agenda would be popular enough, but that in the presence of persistent joblessness, they're going to lose the election. The only thing to do in the meantime is try and pass legislation that'll make the country better off. That's what they've done, or at least what they think they've done.
It's ugly in the sense that policy is irrelevant to the outcome of most elections. I'd really like to believe that this isn't true, and political parties would be rewarded and punished on the basis of the policies that they enacted or blocked. But, as usual, the relationship is much clearer than that. Here's the chart Ezra uses to demonstrate the correlation:
This Week's Notable Readings
So here's the idea. I have begun tweeting links to articles I found interesting. This page is designed to be a sum up of what I those tweets. I'm not sure if I'll make this a weekly of a daily feature, but for the time being it'll be weekly.
So here's what I liked this week:
Clever needs to be kind
What kind of bias does reality have?
Coming Soon - Deflation
Who cares about deficits?
Do tax cuts generate additional tax revenue? (No)
What spending should we cut exactly?
Incentives matter
No one ever is to blame
Who will be our next POTUS?
Leaders of the next congress?
Consistently Greenspan
Current Contenders
He's down but he's not out
Got any links I should take a look at? Feel free to post them in the comments.
So here's what I liked this week:
Clever needs to be kind
What kind of bias does reality have?
Coming Soon - Deflation
Who cares about deficits?
Do tax cuts generate additional tax revenue? (No)
What spending should we cut exactly?
Incentives matter
No one ever is to blame
Who will be our next POTUS?
Leaders of the next congress?
Consistently Greenspan
Current Contenders
He's down but he's not out
Got any links I should take a look at? Feel free to post them in the comments.
Updates, Updates, Updates
Still playing with this blog format thing. Today I:
- Briefly added a link to my photos on Picassa and then thought better of it.
- Searched like crazy trying to find a way to get Facebook status updates onto the blog. It looks like you used to be able to do this with an rss feed and then Facebook turned off the functionality. Which makes sense. They want you to go to their page for content and not somebody else's. So no facebook status feed is in the works (No big loss - the Twitter feed updates more anyway).
- And (crowning achievement) I just added my Pandora stations to the blog. Admittedly, my use of Pandora is very much in its infancy, but I'm pretty sure that is about to change.
- I need to update my Linkedin profile. It's a skeleton. If I'm going to have a web profile, I need to manage it. So that profile needs to some meat. I consider it part of the blog because I link to it from the blog. (See "The Work of Wiebe" to the right).
- I finished Tyler Cohen's book on the train today, so I need to get my quick thoughts on the reading sub-blog, What's Wiebe Reading (again to the right), before I've lost them.
- I've been playing Wii Fit and need to get my quick thoughts on it in my gaming sub-blog, What's Wiebe Playing.
The Twitter Account
My buddy Taylor (Here's his blog: link) got me to sign up for Twitter account a little more than a year ago. It sat and sat and sat. I started using Facebook and wondered what the point of twitter actually was. So it sat some more. I literally never used it. Not even a single tweet.
A few days ago I got to chapter four of The Age of the Infovore: Succeeding in the Information Economy (link) in which the author, Tyler Cohen (Here's his blog: link), goes into detail on all the different types of communication available in this era and the how each one is distinct. And I think I agree. Email is completely different than texting which is completely different than a phone call. Each has a very difference emotional impact and each can be more or less useful depending on the content and intent of the message. Facebook and Twitter both have their own communication uses, as do blogs and face-to-face contact.
So my Twitter experiment begins. You can see I added my twitter posts to this blog (See right). I have exactly one follower (Taylor did have me set-up the account), so I'm not exactly setting the world on fire with my messages. Which is alright. I'd love to think a cluster of people I know and like will begin using it. But even if they don't, I have to say I'm already enjoying getting tweets from people (mostly my favorite bloggers) that I'm now following in my twitter feed.
If I'm still using Twitter next year, then something about this worked. Consider yourself invited to come along for the ride (link).
A few days ago I got to chapter four of The Age of the Infovore: Succeeding in the Information Economy (link) in which the author, Tyler Cohen (Here's his blog: link), goes into detail on all the different types of communication available in this era and the how each one is distinct. And I think I agree. Email is completely different than texting which is completely different than a phone call. Each has a very difference emotional impact and each can be more or less useful depending on the content and intent of the message. Facebook and Twitter both have their own communication uses, as do blogs and face-to-face contact.
So my Twitter experiment begins. You can see I added my twitter posts to this blog (See right). I have exactly one follower (Taylor did have me set-up the account), so I'm not exactly setting the world on fire with my messages. Which is alright. I'd love to think a cluster of people I know and like will begin using it. But even if they don't, I have to say I'm already enjoying getting tweets from people (mostly my favorite bloggers) that I'm now following in my twitter feed.
If I'm still using Twitter next year, then something about this worked. Consider yourself invited to come along for the ride (link).
My Current Facebook Resolution
I created this site in response to my sincere annoyance at the owners of Facebook and their willful disregard for their users. Several of my posts criticize Facebook and link to criticisms of their policy changes. I stand by those posts. It's all true. The people who run Facebook SUCK.
They also have the most useful social media tool going today. I admit that I hoped they would be taken down by their mistakes. It isn't going to happen. They hit the scale needed to keep growing and growing and displacing the other social media pages. Let me put it this way. Your parents bothered to set up Facebook profiles and some of them are actively using it. Your parents are not moving away from this. Neither is every other commercial entity that actively markets their own Facebook page. Facebook won (for now). Facebook is what the cable company was before the satellite providers.
So... How do I reconcile my complete disdain for the owners with the overall usefulness of their services? The key is this blog. I'm going to make a new Facebook ID. I'm going to make it completely public. There is no way I can be surprised by changes in privacy policy when I've given up all pretense of having any privacy. Then I'm going to completely minimize what I put into Facebook. I figure they own anything I put into their system. So what if I just post to my blog and... then use Facebook to link to my blog? Now they can own the link but I control my content. If I want to post photos, well, I'm NOT going to do it on Facebook. I'll link to any number of the other sites that hosts pictures (Flickr, Picasa, Shutterfly, etc.). Why should I give it to Facebook? I know I can't trust them. So I'll just give them the links. To stuff I control.
To sum up, (1) Assume no privacy (2) Keep control of my material. I get the benefits of the friend lists and the friend feed and the voyeuristic view of the people I used to know. I keep the fun stuff. And give Facebook as little as possible.
Will this work? I can't say for sure. It's worth a shot. And I'll continually re-assess my stand. I don't like these guys. But there are plenty of business with services I use whose business practices I don't particularly care for (Think Comcast). Upon reflection I believe I can make this relationship work.
They also have the most useful social media tool going today. I admit that I hoped they would be taken down by their mistakes. It isn't going to happen. They hit the scale needed to keep growing and growing and displacing the other social media pages. Let me put it this way. Your parents bothered to set up Facebook profiles and some of them are actively using it. Your parents are not moving away from this. Neither is every other commercial entity that actively markets their own Facebook page. Facebook won (for now). Facebook is what the cable company was before the satellite providers.
So... How do I reconcile my complete disdain for the owners with the overall usefulness of their services? The key is this blog. I'm going to make a new Facebook ID. I'm going to make it completely public. There is no way I can be surprised by changes in privacy policy when I've given up all pretense of having any privacy. Then I'm going to completely minimize what I put into Facebook. I figure they own anything I put into their system. So what if I just post to my blog and... then use Facebook to link to my blog? Now they can own the link but I control my content. If I want to post photos, well, I'm NOT going to do it on Facebook. I'll link to any number of the other sites that hosts pictures (Flickr, Picasa, Shutterfly, etc.). Why should I give it to Facebook? I know I can't trust them. So I'll just give them the links. To stuff I control.
To sum up, (1) Assume no privacy (2) Keep control of my material. I get the benefits of the friend lists and the friend feed and the voyeuristic view of the people I used to know. I keep the fun stuff. And give Facebook as little as possible.
Will this work? I can't say for sure. It's worth a shot. And I'll continually re-assess my stand. I don't like these guys. But there are plenty of business with services I use whose business practices I don't particularly care for (Think Comcast). Upon reflection I believe I can make this relationship work.
Blog Update
So...
I've been neglecting my blog. No postings for close to ten days and the last few posts were kinda weak. Here's the deal. Blog posting while on vacation is... not going to happen. Then work intruded upon my return. But, I'm still following the noise and just as annoyed at the rise of the tea party, fake deficit concern, and the BP oil spill. I've seen several items that I thought were discussion worthy, but timing is everything and opportunities sometimes get a pass. On to the next topics.
Here are my current blog to-do's:
Thanks for reading. More to come.
I've been neglecting my blog. No postings for close to ten days and the last few posts were kinda weak. Here's the deal. Blog posting while on vacation is... not going to happen. Then work intruded upon my return. But, I'm still following the noise and just as annoyed at the rise of the tea party, fake deficit concern, and the BP oil spill. I've seen several items that I thought were discussion worthy, but timing is everything and opportunities sometimes get a pass. On to the next topics.
Here are my current blog to-do's:
- I have one book to report on in my reading sub-blog (and I'm almost finished with another book).
- I actually have a game to report on in my gaming sub-blog.
- I decided today that I will re-join Facebook. Given the subject of this blog, an entry explaining how and why is imperative. I haven't joined up again yet. When I do, a blog post explanation will definitely follow.
- I decided to start using my twitter account. The best part is my feed gets posted to my blog. So, I need to figure out who to follow on twitter (You're welcome to follow me, my 140 character thoughts are amazing). My Twitter use demands a blog post explanation. Also to come.
Thanks for reading. More to come.
I'm not a fan...
of torture advocates. Sullivan find a great quote from one (link):
"Soccer is a socialist sport," - Marc Thiessen, AEI.
"His column is going to be scathing tomorrow morning"
That's what I said to my wife right after I read this headline last night:
World Leaders Agree on Timetable for Cutting Deficits
Sure enough, here's the title of Krugman's column as of this morning:
The Third Depression
World Leaders Agree on Timetable for Cutting Deficits
Sure enough, here's the title of Krugman's column as of this morning:
The Third Depression
Best Email Ever
OK,
I've used "Best Email Ever" way too many times for that headline to be credible. But really, this is pretty good stuff. Here's a snipet from a post on The Big Picture (Barry Ritholtz's blog) (link):
That explains a ton. Really, it doesn't much insight into human behavior to see how badly the incentives line up here. It wasn't just a housing crisis that brought us to the brink in 2008.
I've used "Best Email Ever" way too many times for that headline to be credible. But really, this is pretty good stuff. Here's a snipet from a post on The Big Picture (Barry Ritholtz's blog) (link):
“The old pay system (era of John Whitehead): you work at an investment bank for 30 years, have a reasonable draw and cash bonus, build up stock in the firm as most of your bonus, and when you decide to retire you request of the partners their permission to go limited. If they assent, you get to withdraw your money over five years, all the while continuing to expose the balance to the risks of the enterprise.
The new pay system post-Donald Lufkin Jenrette’s original I.P.O.: you’re a young 29-year-old punk playing with OPM (Other People’s Money), taking huge risks for which you get huge bonuses, while the outsiders shoulder the losses on your bets. You make all the money you’ll ever need in three years, stay around 15 years to pile up five times as much as you need, and then you retire with your cash hoard, buy a winery in Napa/Sonoma or a huge farm in Connecticut, living above the fray for the rest of your life.
Which system, do you think, makes people consider the downside of their actions?”
That explains a ton. Really, it doesn't much insight into human behavior to see how badly the incentives line up here. It wasn't just a housing crisis that brought us to the brink in 2008.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
