Assorted links

Comments

Turkey is a particularly bitter dispute and I suspect that Dani Rodrik is too personally close to one side for his testimony to be the best guide to what's happening.

The refereeing process article is very thought-provoking. I bet journals are afraid of approving an article that they've previously rejected.

The main constraint (space) isn't relevant anymore in the Internet age. Some journal should accept everything, publishing quality scores or comments alongside.

Oddly, the article on implicit marginal tax rates does not make any mention...

-------------------------------------------

Dan, what would you expect from an article with a title, which is derogatory for healthcare reform? :)
I wonder if Tyler really misses the point that derogatory titles are really not good for a decent economists to link to w/o at least some commenting

Holtz-Eakin was, of course, McCain's chief economist. There are many reasons to criticize the health care reform bill, but something is suspicious in this analysis. For example, a family of four with an income of $98,400 is listed as being in the 28% marginal tax bracket in 2014, which is supposedly a forward projection from the 2010 rates. In 2010 the 28% marginal bracket for a married couple starts at $137,300 _after deductions_. To get down to that income, a family must earn a minimum of $163,300, given $14,600 in exemptions and a standard deduction. Marginal brackets from phase outs are serious things to consider, but this data is simply phony.

5. "The 26-year-old, who squandered his multi-million fortune on drugs, gambling and thousands of prostitutes..."

Finally somebody does it right!

I find it odd that as the US has supposedly moved right after the leftist something for nothing culture of FDR and the Democratic socialists, the US is striving ever more to create wealth through gambling. Of course, the way to get money for government is through government run gambling for the masses, enticing them with promises of wealth. In the private sector, the tax system has been skewed to promote gambling as the means of creating wealth, while increasingly punishing work.

While government run lottery winners returning to poverty is seldom celebrated, we have an odd love-hate relationship with the private sector gamblers. Everyone wanted to be Bernie Madoff's friend for decades. Donald Trump turned private sector gambling into celebrity, and turned the idea of being an apprentice where you learn a career into a gamble for the opportunity of being a gambler.

Think about it; shouldn't a show called "the apprentice" be about picking someone who would begin training to become a blacksmith, a machinist, a pipe fitter or welder, a master Japanese iron maker, sword maker, or sharpener, all jobs that require years of on the job training.

Nah, not in the world since Reagan and Thatcher who dismissed workers as irrelevant to great economies, and elevating the capitalists and bosses and politicians to peak of importance in society and economy.

That busted lotto winner is the symbol of modern society - wealth comes from taking risks, not from work. And when the risk taking throws you back in the gutter, well, I'm sure the reason he wants his job back is to have that extra fifty pounds a week to take the risks needed to create wealth: buying lotto tickets.

"No carbs means no spike in insulin means no over-storage of fat."

That's not how it works.

And I never cease to be amazed at how many people refer to virtually anything not explicitly "left" as being "right wing." It's incredible. I never see anyone call anything left of Limbaugh "left wing," much less anything left of moderate.

Hint: calling things "right wing" that aren't explicitly "right wing" - for example, calling everything you disagree with "right wing" - is the best way to instantly call your capacity for rational thought into question, and to sink your argument.

There's a strange non- bodily-orifice odor emanating from the coke-and-whore millionaire's story. He won the lottery 8 years ago (2002). He is currently, according to the article, 26. ("The 26-year-old, who squandered his multi-million fortune on drugs. . .")

If, I'm figurin' correctly, that would mean he won the prize when he was 18. But the caption with the pic of him receiving his fortune reads "Winning days: Carroll, aged 19, collecting his Lotto check for £9.7million in 2002" 19+8=27
26-8=18

More specifically, and more accurately, he was born March 29,1983. He was ,indeed, 19 years and approx 8 mos. old when he received the prize. But this is May 31, 2010. Any way ya' figger', the guy's 27 now, not 26.

Supposedly the article was updated May 30, 2010.

Do I get a cookie? Do I? Do I?

I sense a business opportunity; if someone gave that guy $1,000,000 no strings attached and followed him around with a camera for six months I think it would be quite a successful reality show.

Why isn't the ice cream parlor in Rwanda for profit like the one in Brooklyn?

On the chav paying for prostitutes. This is an old Clark Gable line: When he was caught with a prostitute, he was asked why he paid for women to be with him when there were so many willing women out there. His reply, "I do not pay them to be with me, I pay them to go away". The guy did not want to have to put up with wooing the women, he wanted to get laid right now the way he wanted to. And then he wanted them to go away. Not saying it is the right thing to do, but understand the motivation to understand the behavior.

Would many or most employers dropping coverage be good for labor market flexibility?

The author sounds interesting. The book rather less so? I wonder why the English are buying it. Do you think sales of this book might have something to do with England's worry about hyperinflation and riots? Anyway this will be a fascinating time to live in Germany for a while. I heard an editor of a big German newspaper speaking about the Greeks and he sounded like an editor of the Daily Mail or Sun during the Falklands war...

Comments for this post are closed