Friday assorted links

Comments

4. Con: "Empirical evidence on the (cost-)effectiveness of concrete interventions is scarce."

Con: "The evidence base is too limited to effectively inform policymakers on the implementation of life skill development in school curricula."

No evidence because nobody trying it; nobody trying it because no evidence. Could we call this "evidence-based complacency?"

1, not 4. Why is editing still not possible here?

File it under: MRU Complacency

#7: "the system of state-sponsored racism": ah, does he mean affirmative action?

all depends on whether you're thinking NBA Championships or putting together Boeing 747's

the division of labor, the division of knowledge

aye, we all live in a peaceful community, we all have our nicvhe

and breath in, the practicality of the magicality. of b n alive

when surrounded by the circumstances, of b n alive, aware partially, due do my poccessor size

processor/schmosseser, we r all effed, enjoy the individual beauty, while it lasts, it'll always be there, different events, different times

how he does it? nobody knows, except for woirds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE0-O0GvTVQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2MtEsrcTTs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ml_V7HNIsY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xW2taEoH6s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrZRURcb1cM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGU_4-5RaxU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-aK6JnyFmk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUr5_QVPCAI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSAob1TnAvc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMVvRImExKc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGFToiLtXro

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gab2Vuz2Nk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7j8wa9sWOE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRp1LZOk05o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CI-0E_jses

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTKL15YUyKk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntDnwBiORu8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0POmdK18WU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtBbyglq37E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=425GpjTSlS4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WT7nBGX5eU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PycKSdKG_74

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rEsVp5tiDQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYh9OdAAaCE

lil, ck skrs, i'l play this song, anytime i feel like

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYh9OdAAaCE

hoo we! a big talks like that? u stfu up and listen . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eCh3y5VROM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRZOI1y4M28

lil', ck skrs, i have no idea y i speak 2 u

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUNgQ03D2qA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukWRRNqMAZ4

a big speaks . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nW5AbdrvfqA&index=6&list=PLmo4pBukfRoN8SB5RKvfiY9CTl9pI_IFc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PM7hFTaKu4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVemUWvl_z4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuDuloOoerg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WT7nBGX5eU

lil, ck skrs, i'll play this song all godamn nite long

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZEWMerW2-Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PycKSdKG_74

Malaysian policy favors "sons of the soil", the disadvantaged majority, so not exactly affirmative action.

You think there won't be any affirmative action when Whites are a minority?

No silly, when Whites are a minority the Blacks and Browns will gang up on them and murder them all. The Jews will be sneaky and convince the Coloreds that they are not White, because they aren't and also they are sneaky.

Your response does not answer the question.

How do you figure? When Whites are all dead no need for affirmative action.

Still no answer, it's almost as if this is a question you don't want anyone to ask.

Are you mentally challenged? White Genocide is a big freaking deal.

Well, yeah. Pretty much. You seem to think this is a criticism.

#3 If fans want better regular season games, maybe they should pay for it.
#7 Down with the PAP regime! Long live Barisan Nasional! Rehabilitate Lim Chin Siong!

Senor Robiero
you are sounding well this morning
can you explain to the class how you assign an actual
grit number to an actual person you don't
know all that well? listening devices in the walls?
how do you create a meme that schools don't
much matter when a lotta the schools that you say
don't matter
are bad schools
biology schools matter because its where they keep the ovaries
and the microscopes and its where most people first
learned to think more empirically.
sociology has come up with a mathematical models that
indicate schools don't matter much?
what is the Brazilian view?
you create a meme that schools don't matter
while also creating a life skills school to help
deal with the effects of bad schools?
a meme
based on mathematical models that might not be
that good
doesn't most of the empirical evidence show that
good schools are good and bad schools are bad

Brazil has invested a lot of money in schools for the children.

Thiago
what are the results ?
the middle class would predict more good not
much bad but sorta difficult to measure
In brazil they wouldn't create a meme that good
schools don't matter based on
a mathematical model that might not be so good
while at the same time getting their own kids into
the good schools would they?
that would be bold
what are the ovaries like in brazil?

did you ever wonder why that statue of karl marx
looks a lot like zardos in the movie zardos where
there were no good schools and things got pretty weird

Brazil has created lots of schools. Literacy rate dame from 15% in 1872 among non-slaves to about 90%.

a lotta money invested in schools is only a good metric for
good schools if a lotta the money is invested well
like mebbe a lot more in biology school where you learn life skills and get to look at ovaries through a microscope
you have to buy the microscope but you don't have to
buy the life skills school
isn't the meme schools don't matter much mebbe
a little too bold based on all the evidence?

Brazil thinks that its students are super smart. From OECD PISA data, most of the 15 yo globally are in grade10. The majority of the 15 yo in Brazil, i.e. 42%, are in grade11, 35% are in Grade10. As such minimum IQ of 87 are automatically promoted to grade11. Brazil is practicing hot-housing at the national level. In USA 72% of the 15 yo are in grade10, 16% in grade11. In Finland 85% of 15 yo are in grade9, 0.15% are in grade11.

#3 is confused. Only a small fraction of those who don't succeed in the post-season are labelled as chokers, some unfairly, but others because they choke.

The idea that these people are giving 110% all the time (unlike the guys who turn it up a notch for the post-season) goes against everything people should understand based on their own life experience.

Agree. #3 - NBA (and MLB) regular seasons are long and grueling. There maybe be periods of "coasting" to preserve strength, avoid injuries, etc. Some nights the three-pointer is dropping others not. Some nights a player has the flu. None of that makes non-chokers lesser people.

Additionally, a different level of preparation, game-planning, and output (play all-out or take the couch) are naturally exhibited in play-off situations at all levels, from high school up.

Did anybody read #2 about how NK negotiations/agreement don't matter? That was certainly true for lesser sorts like Chamberlain, Clinton, two Bushes, and Obama. Let's see how a real man deals with fat, little rocket man.

ask yourself what would ike or john prine do in this situation?
build more sideswalks to the biology building where the
dragon energy is

Basketball? Those sort of chokers? We are not talking about the 65th Attorney General of New York any more?

It is amazing how fast Democrat scandals disappear from the media isn't it? Is Stormy Daniels still getting 24/7 coverage from CNN?

Schneiderman resigned.

If Trump resigns then I imagine the Daniels affair will soon attract much less attention.

LKY was repeatedly on record saying that were Singapore's demographics more weighted towards Malays, it would not be as successful (he additionally said were it 100% Chinese, it would be even more successful).

There is 0% chance that #7 happens; the Singaporean political class is the smartest in the world (The current PM, LKY's son, was Senior Wrangler at Cambridge - Google it if you don't know what that means), they're not going to tank living standards for some "unity" that no one even wants.

#5 - Interesting to see Tim Kane as a signatory. As Tyler noted on Monday's assorted links (5/7), he's running for Congress in Ohio and portraying himself as an anti-Trump Republican on issues like trade and immigration.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/06/business/economy/house-ohio-trade.html

#4. It takes a lot of courage for a faculty member to come out for Trump in today's College campus climate. I see why a number of the signees for prestigious colleges are emeritus.

I am afraid it fits the old-man-and-tv model as well.

BTW, I don't know if everyone has seen it, but the noose seems really tight right now. Russia-linked company that hired Michael Cohen registered alt-right websites during election.

Why would a Russian oligarch, in Putin's circle, who "only wants friendship with the US" be sock-puppeting the alt-right? Because of course he would. He came to the inauguration as well!

Just because somethubg triggers you doesnt make it a crime.

Seriously? "Triggering" is the best you can do?

I still expect more. Better. It is now in evidence, not conjecture or extrapolation, what happened. Straighten up and fly right.

FBI Warned Of Russian Intelligence Links To Oligarch In Cohen Payment Allegation

"It is now in evidence, not conjecture"

"Conjecture" is exactly what it is.

Ha! If you want to have fun on the internet you picked the wrong year or the wrong side.

Did you see Rudy had to be fired from his law firm? Why was that? Truth telling?

You went pretty quickly from accusations of breaking the law to "look, someone got fired from their job." You haven't got squat.

It is a target rich environment!

I feel your pain. I hope you feel better at the end of President Trump's second term. Bless your heart.

Yeah, so much winning. Will Kirstjen Nielsen be the next to go?

Trump as a tremendous way of destroying the people foolish enough to give him a chance.

Perhaps that is why there were so many emeritis professors signing.

I get the impression that back in Sumner's day, teams had fewer 3 games in 3 night and 4 games in six nights kinda stretches than they do today. Perhaps with a less compacted schedule, teams could focus more on character-building exercises.

I think he was comparing Toronto to Cleveland.

I still think the premise is flawed.

7. What's omitted from the linked essay is how China fits into this issue. The Singapore Miracle is a consequence of the China Miracle. If, as Cowen speculates, China reverts to Marxism, what does that portend for Singapore? Of course, Singapore is where China's billionaires spend their money, and time. Singapore, in turn, returns the favor by investing the profits derived from the Chinese billionaires in China through Singapore's sovereign funds. Can that profitable and peaceful co-existence continue if China takes a turn to Marxism? Would impoverished Malaysians be willing to support wealthy Singapore against China? Would working class Americans support the grifter Trump against "elites"?

Was Tyler really saying that China will revert to Marxism or was he just making a point that Maoism is much worse than Marxism?
I think China will continue its current path with no big changes. If things do change significantly, I don't think we can really predict how they will change... It will not be 1917 by definition.

The Singapore Miracle is a consequence of the China Miracle

Rubbish. Singapore experienced a trebling of per capita output during a period (1965-79) which antedated economic reforms in China and antedated exceptional increases in Chinese production. As we speak, 70% of Singapore's exports are sent neither to China, nor to Hong Kong, nor to Macao. Banco Santander has some data on the sources of foreign investment flows into Singapore: 19% originates in the U.S., 16% from offshore accounts, 9% from Japan, 7% from the Netherlands. China as a source country is lower.

Its really a sad comment by rayward.

Singapore was an entrepot for SE Asia, not China. Its too far away.

It attracted investment by being the safe place to have your plant / sales office, etc. for the region.

This was in the 60's when no one did business with China.

rayward knows nothing about anything. This is not new information. But he will keep writing as if he knows something about a lot of things, unfortunately.

Singapore euphemistically specializes in "money management". Right. It's also an oil trading hub and a flag of convenience for many shipping companies. If one were to look at a chart of Singapore's growth rate one would discover that it overlaps China's, flat up until the mid 1980s and then accelerating. Whether China's billionaires disclose capital transfers to Singapore I cannot answer. But I do know they spend lavishly in Singapore. My friend, who has visited Singapore, told me that it's unlike any place he has ever been (and he has been everywhere), what he described as conspicuous consumption on steroids. Whether America's billionaires disclose capital transfers from Russia I cannot answer either.

Singapore euphemistically specializes in "money management". Right.

It does *now*. Because it is a mature market. It started out making cheap plastics, it moved onto petrochemicals and electronics, it is now big in money management. Pretty much what every economy does. Only faster.

If one were to look at a chart of Singapore's growth rate one would discover that it overlaps China's, flat up until the mid 1980s and then accelerating.

No. One would not. Singapore was growing very rapidly in the 1970s. In fact from the moment it was kicked out of Malaysia. Cause and effect is so hard, but I would point out that Deng Xiaoping's second overseas trip was to Singapore. In 1978. Before Deng started to open up the Chinese economy.

The Chinese Communists are not shy of explaining that cause and effect:

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2015-03/23/content_19885798.htm

Just about the time when Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping announced his decision to open up China's economy, he paid a visit to a tiny island state in 1978. His historic visit was one of the first after he became China's top leader.

His conversations with then Singaporean prime minister Lee Kuan Yew centered around his plans to better connect China with the world.

Deng was keen to have a closer look at the Singapore model, with its almost miraculous growth as a global financial hub.

He also expressed interest in Singapore's social management.

Lee had famously told Deng that many Singaporean Chinese are descended from forefathers who had arrived as indentured laborers, half literate, hungry but hard working. They were not from the political elite or literati. If Singapore could develop so well from such peasant stock, there was no reason China could not do better.

Apparently Deng kept these conversations in mind because as China started to develop in the successive years, Singapore sent a series of consultants to help develop the special economic zones.

What is even more remarkable about this is that Singapore recognized Taiwan as the One True China until 1990.

Seriously, rayward is an avatar of anti-knowledge. The more his posts are read, the less humanity knows. We are all worse for him being allowed to write, and I say this as a free speech absolutist.

4. My prediction is that the Law and Econ crowd will be well represented.

Zoltan Acs, Ph.D., George Mason University - 'Zoltan J. Acs is University Professor at the Schar School of Policy and Government and Director of the Center for Entrepreneurship and Public Policy. He is coeditor and founder of Small Business Economics, the leading entrepreneurship and small business publication in the world.' OK, not law and econ. (On the other hand, sounds a bit like grooming for a much better world - 'These graduates apply the knowledge and skills gained in our classrooms at some of the most prestigious companies, consulting firms, nonprofits, multinational organizations, and government agencies in Washington, DC, and beyond.')

Gerald A. Hanweck, Ph.D., George Mason University - 'Gerald A. Hanweck is Professor of Finance in the School of Management at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia.' Another strike.

Anthony B. Sanders, Ph.D., George Mason University - 'Anthony B. Sanders is Distinguished Professor of Real Estate Finance in the School of Business at George Mason University.' Another strike.

J.W. Verret, Associate Professor, George Mason Antonin Scalia Law School - well, at least in baseball, that might be a .250 average. Which is pretty miserable.

What is really striking about that list is how a good quarter are retired faculty.

But one could say that Prof. Cowen is being just a bit coy with the person behind door number 4 - 'J.W. Verret is a senior affiliated scholar at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. From May of 2013 through April of 2015, Verret was on leave to serve as chief economist at House Financial Services Committee. Verret rejoined the Mercatus Center in May of 2015.'

Googling their names, it is striking but the non econ-dept economist faculty looks heads and shoulders more accomplished and relevant than anyone in the econ dept. I left the commonwealth so I no longer care how it leaks away what used to be the 5 figures I paid in taxes each year. Virginia is circling the porcelain with no hope. Too many extractors and too few people who do productive work for a living.

#4: Can we do a follow up in 1 year when 3% doesn't get reached? I mean, will they at least admit they were wrong about that?

Also think they should disclose any Koch funding.

I don't see how any economist can be ok with deficits like this in a good year. It baffles me.

In the most recent year, GDP growth was 2.9%. This seems like a dumb line in the sand for you to draw.

Oh, "Koch funding". Everybody drink.

Yeah, deficits. I hate deficits too- I've been complaining about this all century. Interested in your thoughts on the increase in the deficit between 2015 and 2016, cuz I don't remember you or anybody else complaining then.

It's pretty well understood that deficits are only bad when the other party is running them.

"It's pretty well understood that deficits are only bad when the other party is running them."

+2

"This seems like a dumb line in the sand for you to draw."

I'm sure he'll freely admit he was wrong if it goes the other way. Because otherwise he'd be a hypocrite ...

'Oh, "Koch funding". Everybody drink.'

Would it be so crazy if we did some election reform? I mean, the right obviously hates Soros money. There were those "that march was paid for by Soros" fantasies. Is that enough to overcome "money is speech?"

Makes it that much easier to keep the Russian money out.

How else are we going to keep GDP growth about 2%?

Pretty sure the Kochs didn't support Trump in 2016.

You are correct. They put values first and for that I salute them.

I liked this too: Why a Free Media Means a Free Society

Still, I don't think campaign reform should be as forgotten as it seems to be in 2018.

"Makes it that much easier to keep the Russian money out."

Actually, preventing paranoid fantasies is pretty hard.

That kind of "Russia? Ha ha" stuff was bad in 2017, but at least then it was based on "leads" not "locks."

In 2018 it is being locked down. Deal with it.

I politely decline your invitation to join your hallucination.

That is a very unimpressive list of signers of that "Economists for Trump" letter. I hardly recognize any of the names, other than a few of the usual suspect ideologues (Lott, Laffer, etc.), and Charles Calomiris, who I recognize because he's done some Great Depression research.

1. I wonder to what extent these life skills are simply reflection of ha ing a happier and more hopeful outlook. High school dropouts probably know their future isn't that great, which leads to depression and hopelessness, which leads to lots of things such as risk aversion, lower motivation, etc. In other words the extra education isnt the thing confering the added skills, but the confidence that the extra education lends.

3. Phrasing

I assumed it was referring to Schneiderman before I clicked.

I didn't assume .. but I worried it might be. Glad to see it is not!

Fertility rates in Malaysia: Malay/Bumiputera: 2.4 children per woman, Chinese: 1.4 children per woman and Indian: 1.8 children per woman.

Fertility rate in Singapore is now about 1.2.

If I were Chinese and living in Singapore, I'd sell my apartment at the slightest suggestion of a merger. Either way, it will take a miracle for the Chinese to hang on to Singapore. My suggestion would be to join the motherland.

My suggestion would be to join the motherland.

Do you get piece rates for these suggestions?

My suggestion would be to join the motherland.

For Singaporeans inclined towards exile, the motherland appears to consist of the member countries of ABCANZ Armies.

#3 comes purely because Sumner is a Westbrook fan. Frankly, it's ridiculous. Chokers are probably mocked more than is fair, but that doesn't mean they have better character. Especially with Westbrook. You have a guy who is so maniacally competitive that he is vulnerable to falling into destructive play patterns, which partly drove one of the best players in the league to another team. Now he struggles to enable teammates and his play style runs into limits against better teams. It doesn't make Westbrook a bad person, but it is definitely a short-coming that he can't harness his competitive drive to optimize his performance results.

#3 I don't agree with for many reasons

1. The playoffs is a different style whether you are trying or not. It becomes more physical, referees behave differently, the pace changes, and teams have time to really focus on opponents and make adjustments.

2. Some great regular season teams are just better at beating up at bad teams or exploiting things that aren't available in the playoffs, like drawing cheap fouls.

3. Older players are smart to not exhaust themselves in the regular season.

4. Relates to 1, some players have more inelastic games. That is, the style change in the playoffs doesn't hurt their games. Think LeBron, Jordan, Hakeem. Other guys consistently play worse in the playoffs because their games aren't resistant to the style change. Think David Robinson and James Harden.

Yup, I wonder if Sumner is becoming like too many of the GMU faculty who just plain miss the point of things all too often. To your list I would add George Karl's teams, especially the SuperSonics who had magnificent, 60-win regular seasons and (except for 1996) usually underperformed in the playoffs.

But it wasn't because they were chokers per se, and I don't think even Sonics fans would say it was because they were the best people. Karl utilized an aggressive trapping defense that gave opponents trouble -- until the playoffs when they had multiple days and multiple games to get coaching and practice and experience and make adjustments. And thus playoff opponents could neutralize the Sonics' main regular season weapon.

Yup, I wonder if Sumner is becoming like too many of the GMU faculty who just plain miss the point of things all too often. To your list I would add George Karl's teams, especially the SuperSonics who had magnificent, 60-win regular seasons and (except for 1996) usually underperformed in the playoffs.

But it wasn't because they were chokers per se, and I don't think even Sonics fans would say it was because they were the "best people". Karl utilized an aggressive trapping defense that gave opponents trouble -- until the playoffs when they had multiple days and multiple games to get coaching and practice and experience and make adjustments. And thus playoff opponents could neutralize the Sonics' main regular season weapon.

Why is extroversion an inherently desirable trait?

All else equal, extroverts are outputting more positive social experiences to others than introverts. Extroverts are more of a positive externality.

#3 Extroverts are garbage.

senor Thiago
so if the economists from gmu don't sign the letter do you
figure it
-is because they have specific contentions
with the policies which they can probably explain
-or its mostly trump
-

Both. They dislike Trump and oppose his policies.

the middle class empathizes with the trump angle
what specifically is wrong with whats described in
the economists letter that gmu economist didn't
sign is the issue or is the whole thing just
some sorta contrived loyalty oath like in the movie
the death of stalin with sr. buscemi

Both. They oppose Trump's persona and oppose Trump's policies. Deficits, infrastructure spending, leaving the Iran deal, etc.

Do extroversion and introversion really have to be mutually exclusive?
Can you be introspective and still be capable of striking up a conversation with a total stranger?
I would think that the best of both worlds would be to have both - be able to negotiate both the internal and external worlds.

Some schools explicitly teach that "future time orientation" is racist. That seems an extraordinary toxic think to teach kid (which is why I remember it), but Seattle (among other places) paid a consultant to do it. So I guess there is some disagreement about whether that's a life skill.

https://www.seattlepi.com/local/opinion/article/Planning-ahead-is-considered-racist-1204942.php

It would be interesting to compare the impact of additional formal education to a couple of years in the Marines. My admittedly at a distance impression is that they are pretty good at teaching useful life skills.

If anyone really said that future time orientation was racist, that would be terrible. But I'm suspicious about this article. First, notice that they tape together two quotes:

According to the district's official Web site, "having a future time orientation" (academese for having long-term goals) is among the "aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and Whiteness, and devalue, stereotype and label people of color."

How honest were they about that "is among the?"

It would be nice if they gave us a link to the original, or a screen shot, but they do not. That's pretty bad, actually.

See USSC Community Schools v. Seattle School District, Thomas opinion footnote #30.

The web site was scrubbed after it became something of a local scandal.

Again, I'm with you that there is something screwy being represented:

“Those aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and whiteness, and devalue, stereotype, and label people of color as ‘other,’ different, less than, or render them invisible. Examples of these norms include defining white skin tones as nude or flesh colored, having a future time orientation, emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology, defining one form of English as standard . . . .”

For the record I don't think having a future time orientation or emphasizing individualism are "white." The "future time orientation" is easy to demonstrate because food preservation systems, including grain storage systems, are found world-wide and into prehistory.

But again it's a synopsis of something we don't see.

5. This isn't meant as a comment on Chicago but on economics generally. The questions on the exam read like a parody. I know, that's because I'm just not that smart. True enough. Now read this and tell me economics isn't a parody: https://growthecon.com/blog/Paradox/

#4: Can we request interviews + debates with the Pro Trump Economists and Academics?

Absolutely no one in the Marginal Revolution + related academic blogging circle wanted to endorse Trump?

I was, but got no replies yet.

#1. So the Big Five Personality Traits are now magically transformed into Life Skills?? Perhaps we should pay for Social Scientists to study whether education is able to change skin color or height as well.

5. the economists are very smart
but there are too many of them
the economics dept should send
some of them to the biology dept.
where there are no listening devices in the walls
see who has more fun

just as rust never sleeps
biology is never complacent
dr. cowen why not tonight?
come on over to the biology dept.
you will have more fun

It is extremely easy for Trump to achieve 3 % real GDP growth.
It is a target chosen to fool the press and the public, but I would expect this audience to be better informed.

Over the last several years under Obama when real GDP was so weak, the growth of real output of the non-farm business sector averaged 2.75%. See the data in the BLS productivity data.

So all Trump had to do to get 3% real GDP growth was to allow real government spending to grow rather than contract as it did under the austerity policies imposed by the Republican Congress as a key
tool in its anti-Obama policy. That is exactly what he is doing.

It is a result that really does not mean anything, but he claims it is the greatest thing since sliced bread and no one bothers to check what it really means.

What would Singapore gain from a merger? If the answer is "more Malays," well, how is that working out for the Chinese in Malaysia? The Bumiputra policies may be the White man's future.

If Chinese do not like those pokicies, maybe they should go away.

Many are, brain drain is becoming a problem.

So everything is fine.

If Chinese do not like the policies, they should also have more than zero-child families.

#3; Sumner's point #2.
" Indeed just two days ago the US announced that it would not adhere to the promises it made in an earlier nuclear agreement with Iran."

This is a common error in assessing this. The problem here is that "the US" made no such promises; Barack Obama did. And, as several US Senators made clear in a letter to the rulers of Iran, that is not a national agreement. Only the Senate can ratify a binding agreement. So, the US did not back out on anything. You could argue that Obama hoodwinked the rest of the world into thinking it had a binding agreement, but that is on him, not on our nation.

Sumner's point about how bilateral free trade is also bad is illogical as well. If unilateral free trade is good (US taking in the rest of the world's stuff), then bilateral free trade is even better. The fact that it may increase the US trade deficit even more, at least initially (which is unsourced by Sumner, but let's assume it's true), does not make Trump's trade strategy bad. It's a good strategy by Trump to insist on bilateral trade, even if Trump has not thought through all the consequences.

I thought "Chokers are the best people." was going to be a defense of Eric Schneiderman.

forrest trump everybody. run boy.

4) "Interestingly, several GMU people have signed, but none in the economics department"

The Koch-topus has spoken!

Comments for this post are closed