Friday assorted links

by on April 7, 2017 at 11:56 am in Uncategorized | Permalink

1 Ray Lopez April 7, 2017 at 12:02 pm

There’s no comments here yet, let me be the first to say.

2 Ray Lopez April 7, 2017 at 12:10 pm

I would summarize these posts for you but the last time that got deleted, possibly because I mentioned Scientology in a negative way. They are very litigious and if you say anything nasty…Ooops, never mind. They are a recognized religion according to the US IRS (who was getting dragged into lawsuits by them and therefore agreed to say they were a religion). But Germany is hanging tough, calling them a cult, though there’s no reference to that on the Wikipedia page, which has been closed to further editing, wisely, even having certain Wikipedia editors banned from making any decisions (possibly these editors are Scientologists).

Bonus trivia: L. Ron Hubbard was a George Washington University physics student in the 1930s who flunked out…err, but not before discovering some earth shattering physics, or so they say…

3 Mark Thorson April 7, 2017 at 2:48 pm

I’m sorry Ray, but you’ve been declared a suppressive person, so I must disconnect from you until you do your levels A-E. Your only terminal is the international justice chief at Flag. Do not contact me until you have done so.

4 Ray Lopez April 7, 2017 at 5:12 pm

Yeah, thanks for that link: http://tonyortega.org/2015/07/11/the-story-of-brian-sheen-and-his-disconnected-scientology-daughter-you-havent-heard/ and also indirectly this link to Ms. P. Cooper’s article: https://www.amazon.com/Unbreakable-Miss-Lovely-Scientology-Paulette/dp/1511639377/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1431259276&sr=1-2&keywords=tony+ortega+the+unbreakable+miss+lovely

I’ve read Cooper’s article written, in the late 1960s, and thought it was so innocent; I did not realize the Scientologists went after her so hard. When I lived in LA I met some people doing battle with the org, better left unsaid, and used to walk by one of their offices I think on Wilshire.

5 Ray Lopez April 7, 2017 at 5:16 pm

Bonus trivia: there’s an unpublished short story written by L. Rod Hubbard, a onetime pulp fiction writer, which is stored in the safe of Scientology HQ, that is said to be so powerful that whoever reads it will die, typically by suicide, after reading it. Probably one of their sacred texts by now I would imagine. And if it’s not suicide, I would imagine…oh well, let me not imagine and just leave it to your imagination.

6 Brian Donohue April 7, 2017 at 12:08 pm

#4. Escalators are death traps and should not be negotiated without a helmet and full body bubble wrap. Don’t even get me started on the reckless risk-seekers who actually try to walk on these things.

7 Ray Lopez April 7, 2017 at 12:11 pm

Seems like Average has only begun, for you Brian. What size helmet do you use if you’re a pinhead?

8 Brian Donohue April 7, 2017 at 12:28 pm

Just doing my bit. Anything that keeps you commenting here rather than accidentally procreating is a service to humanity, Ray.

9 Alain April 7, 2017 at 12:30 pm

Ray, you’ve got to admit that was a great burn by Brian.

10 Ray Lopez April 7, 2017 at 12:55 pm

Yes, that was a good one, especially for helmeted BrianD.

11 JFA April 7, 2017 at 1:58 pm

#4: I didn’t know that a discussion about escalators could devolve into a short anti-America rant with such ease.

Also, the wait to stand on the escalator is long because there are too many lazy people standing in line in order to stand on the escalator. Maybe they should be encouraged to walk rather than walkers being encouraged to stand.

12 Thiago Ribeiro April 7, 2017 at 2:05 pm

Americans have become complacent and decadent like a bunch of animals or worse.

13 Proud American April 7, 2017 at 2:45 pm

… like a bunch of animals or worse.

Definitely worse.

Helmet wearing, bubble wrapped animals.

14 Thiago Ribeiro April 7, 2017 at 3:16 pm

Yes, worse than helmet wearing, bubble wrapped animals.

15 albatross April 7, 2017 at 3:55 pm

Helmet wearing, bubble wrapped animals who are thoughtlessly walking on the escalators….

16 Thiago Ribeiro April 7, 2017 at 4:36 pm

Indeed. I’ve never heard of problems in Brazilian scalators.

17 Tuvea April 7, 2017 at 9:42 pm

As bad as they are the dangers from escalators pales in comparison to those from goat petting Zoos.
The risks are palpable as detailed at the scrupulously researched goat-trauma dot org website. Remember, the life you save may be that of a loved one.

18 ChrisA April 7, 2017 at 12:09 pm

The article gives the impression it is the users fault that people are not using escalators efficiently, but if you are standing in the walking lane people will ask you to move aside, so its needs some action by a coordinator not the users to solve the problem. Presumably that can be done just by issuing a new rule, so why don’t they? Also, the only experiments I have seen reported have been escalators going up, what about down escalators. Walking down is usually much faster than walking up.

19 Phil S. April 7, 2017 at 1:20 pm

Generally agree, and to further:

1) If the left side (walking) is underutilized, one could indeed affix the blame on the lazy standers, and posit that if more standers chose to walk, not only would they decrease their own times, they’d decrease them for the remaining standers.

2) Walking/climbing stairs is good exercise.

3) Even if we accept the main premises of the article, they apply to a particular situation – a crowded, steep escalator (going up of course). But humans approach escalators in a variety of situations, including often when they are uncrowded. Should those who want to climb, for speed, exercise, or whatever, always stand, even if the escalator is uncrowded? If the response is supposed to be dynamic, how is it determined, and how do we get social agreement among all potential escalator ascenders at a somewhat crowded escalator?

20 Jody April 7, 2017 at 1:36 pm

The escalator paper only works if you assume that people require much more inter-personal space when walking as opposed to standing and that the escalator is otherwise fully loaded. Otherwise adding any mix of walking to standing should clear more people per unit time.

Clearly, the correct lesson to tae away from the paper is not that standing is superior to walking, but that we should all learn how to run up stairs in lockstep chest to back. Or…. I’m looking forward to our future when we all form human centipedes on escalators

21 Mark Thorson April 7, 2017 at 2:57 pm

The problem is escalators are too slow for the high end of the tail. Solution is to have a superescalator in parallel wih the regular escalator running at 10X the speed. Even then, there will be people running up the superescalator, but what’s wrong with that?

22 bluto April 7, 2017 at 4:11 pm

The bloody death that results the first time someone trips on the 10x speed super-escalater.

23 mikeInThe716 April 7, 2017 at 5:54 pm

The superescalator could not be insured (especially in the US).

Any device or machine used by the masses is generally skewed to accommodate people who are highly uncoordinated AND highly litigious. That said, I’m surprised the Times didn’t suggest fines for escalator “speeders” who flaunt their Ability Privilege.

24 Gerber Baby April 7, 2017 at 12:09 pm

So what do you guys think of the Syria attack? I know the cucks here are going to be all “har har,” but I have to say it, I feel betrayed by Trump.

25 Gerber Baby April 7, 2017 at 12:20 pm

6. Author claims that “Today he tweeted that discouraged workers who have given up looking for work are counted as “employed.”” I’m not seeing anything in the twitter feed, nor could I find anything about a deleted tweet. Fake news.

26 prior_test2 April 7, 2017 at 1:04 pm

Good catch, as Trump said the following, and did not tweet it – ‘“When you look for a job, you can’t find it and you give up, you are now considered statistically employed. But I don’t consider those people employed.” – President Trump, remarks to CEO town hall, April 4, 2017

He continued, again speaking though not tweeting – ‘Speaking to the chief executives, Trump also repeated his Four-Pinocchio claim that “100 million people” are seeking jobs. “A lot of those people came out and voted for me.” Trump said. “I call them the forgotten man, the forgotten woman. But a lot of those people — a good percentage of them — would like to have jobs, and they don’t.”

Followed by this explanation – ‘Trump uses an exaggerated number for the people not in the labor force. But as we have explained repeatedly, most of those people — 93 percent — do not want jobs. That’s because they are people who are retired, students, stay-at-home parents or disabled.

————————————-

We can only imagine the confusion among the corporate chieftains as they heard the president utter gibberish about the unemployment rate. Let’s hope this briefing finds its way to the president and he speaks with more authority in the future.’ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/04/04/please-can-someone-brief-the-president-on-the-unemployment-rate/

It is undoubtedly important to ensure accuracy in reporting, and to ensure that what Trump writes or says is faithfully repeated – it makes the buffoonery so much more entertaining than what a reporter can create on their own.

27 Harun April 7, 2017 at 3:34 pm

Disabled can mean “disabled.”

My “disabled” landlord re-did the electrical and re-roofed the rental by himself.

See, he is “disabled” and can’t drive a truck, but he can do roofing, apparently.

28 Cooper April 7, 2017 at 4:24 pm

The strong economy of the late 1990s dragged people into the labor force who were otherwise uninterested in employment.

If the minimum wage were set at $40/hour, lots of people who are currently retired would start applying for jobs as Walmart greeters. No?

There wouldn’t be jobs available for them but they would still crowd the market looking for one.

Workers respond to price signals too.

29 mavery April 7, 2017 at 12:28 pm

I’m curious. Why do you feel betrayed?

30 The Anti-Gnostic April 7, 2017 at 1:05 pm

Read Trump’s tweets from the 2013 non-attack.

31 Gerber Baby April 7, 2017 at 1:12 pm

We didn’t vote for this! We voted against this type of crap, and I when I say we, I’m not talking about the careerist neocons who came out in support of Trump on November 3 and probably voted for Hillary Clinton, I’m talking about actual Trumpists and nationalists. We did not elect him because we liked his charm. We elected him because of his ideas. The cuckservatives accused him of being not a real conservative, and we didn’t care because we don’t care that much about taxes or abortion or even gay marriage. But we care about non-interventionalism, we wanted a president who would put America first and who wouldn’t believe the “experts” who lied us into war in Iraq. Trump himself specifically said that Obama needed to get congressional approval to attack Syria. But that all went out the window, now Trump ignores the American people in favor of listening to the very people whose influence we voted against: the idiot generals who don’t know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite, shrieking, childless female reporters who are eternally OUTRAGED about the way world works, and a bunch of ethnic activists and their shabbos goyim who have never seen an Arab they don’t want to either be bombed or allowed to immigrate to White countries.(but not to Israel)

32 Jasy April 7, 2017 at 2:24 pm

Not a fan of the attack but I appreciate that Trump took the action to 1) send a signal to other world powers that he is willing to use force and 2) send a signal that norms against WMD use would be enforced. I hope he now wisely takes a step back and does not interfere further.

33 Beefcake the Mighty April 8, 2017 at 8:44 am

You’re a fan of attacking a country without the slightest reason? There is not a shred of proof that Assad did what the Americans claim, but I guess looking tough is more important than little details like that.

You want to look tough? The neocon cabana boy Rubio blames Russia as well, try dropping some bombs on them. Yeah, that’s what I thought. Go back to Starbucks, tough guy.

34 Hazel Meade April 7, 2017 at 2:53 pm

This seems like a perfect example of people projecting their own ideas of what they wanted Trump to represent onto him instead of paying attention to what he was actually saying.

35 4Kran April 7, 2017 at 3:39 pm

Utter nonsense. All throughout the campaign, the liberals and neocons tried to talk him into attacking Assad with their whole nonsense about Aleppo and no-fly zones. Remember the debates? He was steadfast in maintaining the simple logic that you can’t fight two sides of a civil war at once, he wanted to fight those who actually attacked us, ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

I’m feeling pretty disappointed right now. Let’s home this is a one-off and Trump doesn’t try to “punish” Assad further.

36 Hazel Meade April 7, 2017 at 4:33 pm

I guess it depends on whether you took anything Trump said seriously. He always seemed to change his position depending on the audience.
He’s talked about increasing military spending, and his budget does that.

Ultimately whether the bombs fall on Assad’s government or on ISIS, the money still goes to the same people.

37 TMC April 7, 2017 at 6:30 pm

Using chemical weapons doesn’t change your opinion at all?

38 Beefcake the Mighty April 8, 2017 at 8:47 am

Where is the evidence that chemical weapons were used? And I don’t mean some kid who says he saw a Mig fly overhead. I mean a proper investigation. You know, the kind of thing the Americans always oppose when it doesn’t serve their purposes.

39 N.K Anton April 7, 2017 at 3:07 pm

At least Obama waited til a Nobel Prize to sell out the enthuiastic starry-eyed idealists who voted for him.

40 Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta April 7, 2017 at 5:00 pm

Trump: We should have taken Iraq’s oil

“We should have kept the oil… but maybe we’ll have another chance…”

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/01/26/donald-trump-iraq-oil-newday.cnn

What oil does Syria offer other than that potentially being pumped out the mouth of a pipeline into the mediterranean?

41 The Anti-Gnostic April 7, 2017 at 5:45 pm

He’s right. If you’re going to play the empire game, go big or go home. Tell the natives you’re welcome for getting rid of the despot and we’ll take the oil as partial payment.

42 Anon7 April 7, 2017 at 8:46 pm

If Obama was a disaster, then the antithesis of Obama is greatness. Obama drew a red line and did nothing when Assad crossed it. Trump did not draw a red line but bombed Syria anyway. Making America Great Again!

43 Ricardo April 8, 2017 at 6:15 am

“childless female reporters who are eternally OUTRAGED about the way world works”

As opposed to racists and antisemites who post in blog comments about being OUTRAGED that politicians don’t always keep their promises. Most of us understood Trump to be an obvious con man for years.

44 Yancey Ward April 7, 2017 at 12:30 pm

I feel a bit betrayed, too. I feel like this gas attack was not perpetrated by the Assad government- everything about seems just a bit too perfect a piece of anti-Assad propaganda by his enemies in Syria.

45 Thiago Ribeiro April 7, 2017 at 2:06 pm

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/159264981001/the-syrian-gas-attack-persuasion
It is funny how a certain kind of person keeps trying to excuse Assad and his Russian masters.

46 Peter April 7, 2017 at 3:23 pm

Ugh, I used to read Scott Adams, but had to give up after so much “Master Persuader” crap. Scott thinks that just because he’s easily persuaded, everyone else is too. Maybe it’s true, but saying “Everyone is just as dumb as me” doesn’t strike me as all that profound.

47 Tuvea April 7, 2017 at 9:50 pm

He was certainly wrong about President Trump being a “Master Presuader”.

After all, former Secretary of State, former Senator and former First Lady Clinton received more than 2.7 million votes than he did in the 2016 Presidential election. If anyone was a “Master Persuader” it was her.

48 Loliop April 7, 2017 at 10:17 pm

“After all, former Secretary of State, former Senator and former First Lady Clinton received more than 2.7 million votes than he did in the 2016 Presidential election. If anyone was a “Master Persuader” it was her.”

And yet she still lost the election. How did Trump manage that? Did he know something she didn’t?

49 4Kran April 7, 2017 at 3:40 pm

And it’s funny(by which I mean completely predictable) the type of person who keeps trying to excuse Al-Qaeda and ISIS.

50 Thiago Ribeiro April 7, 2017 at 4:39 pm

Yeah, I am sure all the kids Assad is murdering are secret Al-Qaeda operatives. We know how much the Russian butchers care about children…

51 Beefcake the Mighty April 8, 2017 at 8:49 am

It’s funny how a certain kind of person believes everything he’s told.

52 Harun April 7, 2017 at 3:36 pm

I wonder if Assad is sending a signal of his own, to say Turkey or Israel, that they still have WMD’s and that was worth the American retaliation.

Might also stiffen Russian support in some ways.

53 Hazel Meade April 7, 2017 at 2:51 pm

Why? He’s a nationalist, and his motto is “Make America Great Again!”.
Why would you imagine that meant not asserting American military power?

54 Jasy April 7, 2017 at 4:04 pm

Nationalism to me means standing up for United States interests. Striking Syria because a bunch of Syrians (read NOT Americans) got gassed by an unknown perp arguably does nothing to advance US interests.

55 Jasy April 7, 2017 at 4:06 pm

This is not my position. I agree with albatross’s comment below.

56 Cooper April 7, 2017 at 4:27 pm

That depends on whether you think maintaining the current international taboo on the use of chemical weapons is in the interest of the United States.

57 albatross April 7, 2017 at 4:03 pm

The real question is what comes next, right?

First of all, it makes sense to try to deter people using chemical weapons. A world where governments don’t want to use chemical weapons (internally or externally) is a better world overall–there’s likely less human suffering (though nerve gas probably isn’t the worst way anyone’s found to die in Syria in the last few years) and less opportunity for hard-to-deter groups (terrorists, guerillas, etc.) to get hold of them and use them on us. Deterring future uses of nerve gas is well worth a few cruise missiles.

Second, it makes no sense at all, IMO, for us to end up in a war in Syria. We’re kind-of slowly moving in that direction (we’ve apparently got over a thousand people in Syria now), and our ground wars/occupations/nation-building exercises in that region have been a long sequence of expensive failures.

So long as this is a one-off, intended to impress upon the world that using chemical weapons will have a cost, it was probably a reasonable move. If it’s the first step toward sticking our tender bits into the sausage grinder that Syria has become, then it’s a really terrible idea.

58 The Anti-Gnostic April 7, 2017 at 4:41 pm

Problem is the counter-factual. Syria says it bombed a rebel depot that apparently had chemical munitions in it. It seems odd that the Syrian government held back a few weapons to lob at a random village four years later in a war they’re winning. In which case, we look like a bully throwing a tantrum but probably nothing new there.

The other problem is if the US doubles down on the whole Assad-must-go, let-democracy-bloom mission. Iraq, Libya, Egypt and Afghanistan are all instructive and not in the optimistic way.

Maybe it’s just a love tap to let people know who’s boss. Too early to tell.

59 Beefcake the Mighty April 8, 2017 at 8:52 am

It’s highly revealing how liberals (including their cuck lapdogs on the official right) don’t want to know what really happened here. It’s just bombs away on the flimsiest of pretexts. Not even the NYT pretends the 2013 attack was Assad’s doing anymore.

America’s militant refusal to engage in independent thought has never been more on display.

60 Zach April 7, 2017 at 4:55 pm

I think Trump only acts in self-interest and this is plainly in self-interest (at a minimum it transiently boosts his popularity and at a maximum if there’s criminal Russia/Trump-campaign collusion this might be necessary to avoid impeachment). Naive of his supporters to expect otherwise.

61 Floccina April 8, 2017 at 2:04 pm

My business partner was a Trump supporter for the sole reason that Trump ran against war in the middle east. He is disappointed and angry.

62 Ray Lopez April 7, 2017 at 12:19 pm

#5 – the Keynes art collection piece was meaningless since it did not have numbers. Keynes, as we know, was a good investor. Here is my file on Keynes: John Maynard Keynes: “Also, some people manage to get rich using a value approach – such as Keynes himself, who parlayed fairly modest savings into what would amount to about £ 10 million in today’s money.” cite: Wasik (2014)”. I don’t know what percent of this was from the art collection, but I think most of it was from the stock market.

63 SF April 7, 2017 at 12:26 pm

#3 – Whatever happened to this version of Paul Krugman? Seemed like a pretty reasonable person.

64 Ray Lopez April 7, 2017 at 12:50 pm

#3 – indeed, the Krugman paper on the pros and cons between a fixed exchange rate (which Iceland today wants to go back to) and a floating exchange rate (popularized as a cure-all by Friedman in the 1970s) is very good, saved to my archives. Krugman on p. 23 agrees that today’s proposed pegged exchange rate is probably best, rather than a pure floating exchange rate.

Bonus trivia: Krugman, writing in 1991, should have cited the Baxter & Stockman (1989) paper showing that large swings in floating exchange rate Fx markets have little or no effect on real variables, that is, money is largely neutral in Fx adjustments, but that’s somewhat beside the point, as Krugman is making a theoretical argument, the 1991 paper was a draft, and Krugman on p. 5 and elsewhere does indirectly cite Baxter & Stockman, though not by name, by pointing out free floating exchange rates are not a panacea for small relatively not-open countries like Iceland.

65 FYI April 7, 2017 at 4:50 pm

The further you go back on time the more reasonable he becomes. Which is not really a good thing …

66 Ray Lopez April 7, 2017 at 12:34 pm

#2 – the Folsom Prison Blues/Pinball Wizard Mashup – Johnny Cash – The Who – Puddles Pity Party” mashup was amazingly good (sometimes they are not). From an IP perspective, it’s not clear if this is a derivative work in copyright (which makes it NOT subject to copyright infringement to the original copyright owners), or not. AlexT, what you say?

67 mavery April 7, 2017 at 1:02 pm

It’s a clown singing The Who while imitating Johnny Cash. I’m no lawyer, but surely this is covered by the same “fair use” principles that Weird Al and other satirists use.

68 cthulhu April 7, 2017 at 1:46 pm

As a major Who and Cash fan (interestingly enough, Who lead singer Roger Daltrey is a huge Johnny Cash fan, and Who concerts often play Johnny Cash music over the PA after the show is over), I found this to be amazingly good and totally obvious in retrospect. Major props to the clown!

For sheer chutzpah though, it’s hard to beat the mashup (although they weren’t called that then) between “Stairway to Heaven” and the theme from “Gilligan’s Island” that Dr. Demento played in the ’70s.

69 Moo cow April 7, 2017 at 2:39 pm

#2 This is why I love YouTube. Where else would you ever see this? Maybe the old gong show.

70 Ray Lopez April 7, 2017 at 7:06 pm

@mavery, perhaps, but “Fair Use” is a very expensive defense. Copyright lawyers often say it can only be determined at trial, after you’ve spent say $100k in legal fees. One reason “fair use” is never really used as a defense in negotiations, unless really obvious. I don’t think a mashup is a parody either. I think the best defense might be ‘derivative work, so no copyright infringement’.

71 Larry Siegel April 8, 2017 at 3:55 am

or “That isn’t Pinball Wizard and I never claimed to be Johnny Cash.”

72 John April 7, 2017 at 12:36 pm

“Boarding an escalator two by two and standing side by side is the better approach.”

Who is going to board a escalator shoulder to shoulder with some stranger? I don’t even want to do this with my own wife. This is beyond idiotic.

73 Ray Lopez April 7, 2017 at 12:54 pm

Why do you Nordic people have such fetishes against touch? You’re inhuman. I tried to pet the blond little boy neighbor on the head and he looked at me like I was a pedophile. Never mind if a woman hugs him, same response. He says his own parents don’t touch him. Not human. The reason Nordic people are so phobic and uptight. Hang around with monkeys more to see how humans should react. Yes I have a pet monkey, she is very cute and clever. Better than many humans.

74 msgkings April 7, 2017 at 1:24 pm

So desperately lonely. But a delicious irony in you being looked at LIKE you were a pedophile. LOL.

75 anon April 7, 2017 at 1:28 pm

When I was a kid I hated people patting me on the head, especially strangers. Now I do it to my kids and they don’t seem to mind though

76 Thiago Ribeiro April 7, 2017 at 2:08 pm

I like to pat kids on their heads, but one must ask theirs parents first – society is becomimg increasingly litigious.

77 Pistolier April 7, 2017 at 3:02 pm

Ray, maybe your monkey has been talking to the neighbors about you behind your back?

78 Harun April 7, 2017 at 3:41 pm

“Mr. Ray, he beats me. And Mr. Ray is behind two months in payments to my father. That Mr. Ray is a bad man.”

79 Harun April 7, 2017 at 3:42 pm

not accusing, just imagining a scenario.

80 Monkey Bidness April 8, 2017 at 3:09 am

Monkeys are as good as economists at predicting the fuchah, but you need ear protection.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=63tOsL7ySbM

81 Jody April 7, 2017 at 1:45 pm

Clearly, they’re underoptimizing. We could double capacity by carrying others on our shoulders. Triple or quadruple capacity if we only allow the Flying Wallendas onto escalators.

Plus by riding on each others’ shoulders we could then chicken fight while on the escalators. .Or even after we got off the escalators. Screw this, I’m going to go hop in the pool…. and chickenfight,,,

82 mulp April 7, 2017 at 12:59 pm

1. Given Uber, Lyft, airbnb, et al make small business starts easier than ever, especially if the start serving rural areas, the investment fund mentioned, like most of the rest, funnels most funds to people in super high tax, big government, crushing regulation States, but not into tax cutting and let corporations exploit workers and consumers States.

Where are the investment funds that will only invest in tax cutting Kansas, pillage the land and kill workers Appalachia, etc? Why didn’t Trump invest in the State’s that elected him instead of only the States that oppose him?

83 Harun April 7, 2017 at 3:45 pm

Trump invested in Florida. Which elected him.

84 Anon7 April 7, 2017 at 10:55 pm

Rent seeking is more profitable in places with high taxes, heavy regulation, and much corruption.

85 Pete April 7, 2017 at 1:08 pm

#4: People that care to get to save 13 seconds and people who don’t lose time. Why are we to assume that reducing the average time is best when it takes time from those that value their time the most?

How about if everyone walks? I’m certain that would save every group time.

86 chuck martel April 8, 2017 at 7:05 am

What happens to time that is “saved”? Do time-savers stuff their saved time into the slot of a time piggy bank? If a time-saver saves seven minutes a day by brushing his teeth on the way to work, after a month does he have two hours and twenty minutes of extra time that his less-obsessed neighbors have foregone? The Western fixation on time is unhealthy to point of insanity.

87 A B April 7, 2017 at 1:36 pm

#4- A great example of a research paper restating the obvious which becomes misinterpreted in a news article leading to bad advice.

Sure, during ‘peak periods,’ i.e., periods where the escalators would be full, it makes no sense at all to have everyone pushed over to one area and have a walking lane. Just like in a two-lane highway, it makes no sense to have everyone in the right lane except for speeders.

And people naturally do this already. Really, does anyone think people wait on line for an escalator when there’s a whole side open?

But this counts as research and then counts as news. So now we’re going to have more cases of 2 people on an otherwise empty escalator standing next to each other and blocking someone who’s in a rush. Thanks, guys.

88 kevin April 7, 2017 at 1:50 pm

If you give them a boisterous, “excuse me”, and as a last resort squeeze through those 2 people they’ll think twice before doing it again

89 chuck martel April 8, 2017 at 7:08 am

” we’re going to have more cases of 2 people on an otherwise empty escalator standing next to each other and blocking someone who’s in a rush.”

Who cares if someone’s in a rush? What entitles them to disturb another’s schedule?

90 Paul April 7, 2017 at 1:50 pm

6. Neil Gorsuch just got confirmed. So no, not same old. “Elections have consequences.”

91 Moo cow April 7, 2017 at 2:37 pm

Yeah same old. He would have been confirmed under President Rubio. Or any Republican.

President Clinton would get no confirmation. That would be not same old same old.

92 albatross April 7, 2017 at 4:06 pm

President Clinton with a majority in the Senate would have gotten a confirmation, if necessary by going nuclear.

93 Cooper April 7, 2017 at 4:45 pm

Albatross is correct.

If Clinton had won a few more votes in states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin she would have won the presidency and tipped a couple more Senate seats in her favor.

No chance she lets that Supreme Court seat sit empty.

94 Anon7 April 7, 2017 at 11:02 pm

Johnson won his senate seat by 3.5%. Only PA was close. That’s only 49. No change.

95 Larry Siegel April 8, 2017 at 3:59 am

Well, sure. We tried the “nice Republican” strategy. John McCain, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich are all nice. They didn’t win. (Confession: I am a “never Trumper,” but he is doing some good things; Nikki Haley and Neil Gorsuch are almost worth the aggravation of looking at the Orange Man’s face.)

96 Philippe Lemoine April 7, 2017 at 1:59 pm

With respect to 6, it’s probably true that the enthusiasm for exit from the Middle East is fading on the right, which I think is unfortunate. It’s just goes to show how powerful the rally-around-the-flag effect is. In case someone is interested, I wrote a very detailed blog post, in which I examine the evidence about the recent chemical attack and compare the situation with what happened after the chemical attack in Ghouta in August 2013. I argue that, in that previous case, the media narrative had rapidly unravelled and that, for that reason, we should be extremely prudent about the recent attack and not jump to conclusions. It’s more than 5,000 words long and I provide a source for every single factual claim I make. I really believe it’s the most through discussion of the allegations against Assad with respect to his alleged use of chemical weapons out there. Please share it if you thought it was interesting.

97 Hazel Meade April 7, 2017 at 2:56 pm

It’s probable that a significant part of Trump’s support came from nationalist hardliners who could just not stand being wrong about Iraq. ‘Make America Great Again!’ can easily be interpreted as code for ‘Make America a Global Military Empire Again!”

Nevermind Trump’s promises to increase military spending by a whopping amount which he is obviously following through on.

98 Brian Donohue April 7, 2017 at 3:23 pm

Is it probable? Hawkish neocons hate Trump more than any other GOP group does.

99 Niroscience April 7, 2017 at 3:39 pm

Hawkishness is just a preference for a certain kind of international politics and style.Neocons, liberal internationalists and nationalists can all be hawks for very different reasons and view military and violence very differently.None of that may not matter all that much for dead soldiers and civilians though.

Also,I think a good chunk of neocon hawks worry Trump’s ideological adjectant on patrioitism and cultural nationalism may ruin the brand even more.

100 Hazel Meade April 7, 2017 at 4:28 pm

Right. Nationalists and neo-cons aren’t necessarily the same group. Nationalists just want to see America “win”. They’re the sort of people who say things like “now that we’re in it, we need to win it”, because it would be shameful for America to be seen as losing.

101 Beefcake the Mighty April 8, 2017 at 8:54 am

Neocons are nationalists. Only, the nation they support is Israel, not America.

102 4Kran April 7, 2017 at 3:58 pm

There were certainly a few people like that, but they were idiots who didn’t watch the debates,(where he repeatedly condemned George Bush and the war) and, as “low information voters,” they don’t have much influence. All the neocons opposed Trump.

103 Monkey Bidness April 8, 2017 at 3:35 am

The neocons lost but the low info voters with no influence won. Cognitive dissonance?

104 wiki April 7, 2017 at 3:19 pm

#7 might explain research showing that Catholic schools are good at improving non-cognitive/character aspects of their students thus boosting their life chances even if cognitive ability is little changed.

105 Zach April 7, 2017 at 4:49 pm

Put a rigid, transparent divider in the middle of the escalator. Clearly indicate which side is for walking and which is for standing. Have an elevator for anyone with something big to carry (required by law in USA anyway). Guarantee this piece of plastic retrofitted to existing escalators will be faster than any of these experiments.

Also Tyler shouldn’t be allowed to comment on this sort of thing without being reminded of his rant that people need to merge well before the point a lane closes a few years ago…

106 FYI April 7, 2017 at 4:55 pm

Well, Trump only did what he did because of the absurdity of Syria’s chemical attack. I could not watch any more than 10 seconds of a video showing people chocking to death. That, compounded with the irresponsible rhetoric of Democrats around Russia made this a golden opportunity for Trump to kill two birds with a few missiles.

At the end of the day, Trump will not do anything more drastic here because there is no good option to replace al-Assad. So yeah, it was really just theater but theater with a pretty good ROI.

107 rowrow April 7, 2017 at 5:05 pm

#5 – if their figures on value and cost of his art collection are correct then the authors make a mistake in the calculation of the annualized rate of return – closer to an impressive 18% rather than an ordinary 4% – so why trust anything else they say?

108 Mort Dubois April 7, 2017 at 8:13 pm

Exactly – the error jumped out me, and I am mostly innumerate.

109 Peldrigal April 12, 2017 at 8:48 am

#3 I frankly read the piece as “There are no compelling reasons for one side or the other, Iceland policymakers are thinking of joining the SME because it’s fashionable”.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: