Tag Archives: crisis

The American View of Terrorism In One Chart

by BrandenK92 Posted on December 14, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Courtesy of Gallup, this chart shows how Americans think of terrorism. It’s pretty simple: an attack on Americans produces a sizeable spike for a month or three. An attack on a European country produces a somewhat smaller reaction. An attack anywhere else is a yawn. The only possible exception is the Bali bombings of 2002, which is hard to untangle from the Beltway sniper hysteria, which happened at the same time.

If history is any guide, the current spike will be gone by January or February. Then again, there’s an election season about to start. I guess there’s no telling how long people can be kept terrified if our presidential candidates really put their minds to it.

Source article – 

The American View of Terrorism In One Chart

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The American View of Terrorism In One Chart

Today’s Completely Invented BuzzFeed Meme That’s Sweeping the World

by UlrikeJarrell Posted on December 14, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

This is amazing. There’s a trending meme on social media that’s starting to gain steam on ordinary old media: Who should have been Sports Illustrated’s Sportsperson of the Year? Serena Williams or American Pharoah? The answer, of course, is Serena Williams, because SI has chosen human beings for this award for the past 60 years. Secretariat didn’t win it. Seattle Slew didn’t win it. Affirmed didn’t win it. And now, American Pharoah hasn’t won it. This is because they are horses, not human beings.

So what’s the deal? Apparently BuzzFeed managed to start all this by publishing a piece noting that a few horse racing fans were upset that American Pharoah didn’t win. Not lots of fans. Just horse racing fans. And not even a lot of horse racing fans. Just a few. But some of them complained on Twitter! Maybe a few dozen or so. That’s about 0.00003 percent of the Twitter population.1

In other words, BuzzFeed spun a piece out of almost literally nothing, and now the rest of the world is talking about it. Truly we live in a miraculous era.

POSTSCRIPT: For those of you who aren’t tennis fans, trust me: Serena deserved this. Her record this year was almost beyond belief, and that’s at the age of 33, when most top tennis players are either retired or just barely holding on. And of course, that’s on top of a career that makes her a strong candidate for best tennis player of all time.

1More or less. Actually, I just made up this number, since it doesn’t deserve the time it would take to come up with a real one.

See the original post:

Today’s Completely Invented BuzzFeed Meme That’s Sweeping the World

Posted in Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Today’s Completely Invented BuzzFeed Meme That’s Sweeping the World

Remember That Shot Fired a Few Months Ago in the Great Immigration vs. Wages War? Turns Out It Was a Dud.

by WinfredBSB Posted on December 14, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Does immigration depress wages? One of the seminal studies of this was done by David Card in 1990. He studied the Mariel boatlift of 1980, which swamped Miami with new immigrants, and concluded that there was little effect on wages. A few months ago, George Borjas took a fresh look at the data, and concluded there was an effect, but it was restricted to those without a high school diploma. Among high school dropouts, wages dropped 10-30 percent for about six years.

The key chart is on the right. Click here for more detail, but the nickel version is that the blue line shows the wages of Miami’s dropout population compared to other cities. I wrote about this at the time, and noted an oddity: “Before 1980 and after 1990, the wages of high school dropouts in Miami are above zero, which means dropouts earned more than high school grads. That seems very peculiar, and none of the control cities show the same effect. Does this suggest there’s something wrong with the Miami data?”

Yes it does! A pair of researchers at UC Davis tried to recreate Borjas’s conclusions, but they couldn’t do it. “Significant noise exists in many samples,” they say, “but we never find significant negative effects especially right after the Boatlift, when they should have been the strongest.”

So what’s up? Where did Borjas get his huge effect? Well, it turns out that his Miami data was indeed suspect:

We find that the main reason is the use of a small sub-sample within the group of the high school dropouts, obtained by eliminating from the sample women, non-Cuban Hispanics and selecting a short age range (25-59). All three of these restrictions are problematic and, in particular, the last two as they eliminate groups on which the effect of Mariel should have been particularly strong (Hispanic and young workers). We can replicate Borjas’ results when using this small sub-sample and the smaller March CPS, rather than the larger May-ORG CPS used by all other studies of the Boatlift. The drastic sample restrictions described above leave Borjas with only 17 to 25 observations per year to calculate average wage of high school dropouts in Miami.

So Borjas used a small March census sample, and then left out several groups that should have shown a strong response to the wave of immigration. As a result, his sample size is so small as to be useless. Tweaking his data even slightly removes the wage effect entirely.

Borjas does mention sample-size problems in his paper, but never really addresses it or makes it clear just how tiny his sample is. I’ll be curious to hear Borjas’s reaction to this, but given the questions I already had about his paper, this reappraisal of his data puts it pretty firmly in the category of unlikely to be true. For now, it appears that even a massive influx of new immigrants over a period of just a few weeks has almost no effect on wages at all.

Does this mean that immigration in general also has no effect on wages? Nope. But it certainly suggests that the effect is probably pretty small if it exists at all. In any case, the Borjas paper doesn’t seem to prove anything one way or the other.

Original source:

Remember That Shot Fired a Few Months Ago in the Great Immigration vs. Wages War? Turns Out It Was a Dud.

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Remember That Shot Fired a Few Months Ago in the Great Immigration vs. Wages War? Turns Out It Was a Dud.

Maybe Conservatives Have a Point About the War on Christmas

by NolaSolano Posted on November 11, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Joshua Feuerstein has earned 15 million views for his viral Facebook video claiming that “Starbucks wanted to take Christ and Christmas off of their brand new cups.” And you know, the guy has a point. We liberals have been mocking the “War on Christmas” for years, but this time maybe we’ve finally gone too far. Take a look at last year’s cup and this year’s cup and you be the judge.

More here:  

Maybe Conservatives Have a Point About the War on Christmas

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Maybe Conservatives Have a Point About the War on Christmas

New Suitcase Offers Nothing New, Gets Big Writeup in Slate

by LukeSackett Posted on November 9, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Today, in what is apparently not an ad, Slate is running an ad for Away, a fabulous new carry-on suitcase designed by two former Warby Parker executives. Here’s the skinny:

To create their carry-on, Rubio and Korey spoke with thousands of people to determine what travelers look for most. They found that many consumers want attractive, well-constructed luggage that provides organization and….

With that in mind, they created a carry-on that has four durable double wheels—a design detail that alone took 20 designs iterations to get right—plus a laundry separation system that keeps belongings organized, YKK zippers that provide stability, and a….

Hmmm. So far that sounds like pretty much every other carry-on suitcase in the galaxy. But wait! What’s behind those ellipses? This:

….and a built-in 10,000 mAh battery that can be charged beforehand and power a smartphone up to five times during a trip.

So let me get this straight. The big selling point of this suitcase is that it includes a built-in battery that’s a lot less convenient than a standalone battery you can put anywhere you want? Or is it just that it has a special pocket for a battery? Either way, who cares? Buy a suitcase and a 10,000 mAh battery (about 20 bucks on Amazon) and you’ll have the same thing the Warby Parker execs are hawking. And probably pay less.

What am I missing? Why did Slate run this?

This article:  

New Suitcase Offers Nothing New, Gets Big Writeup in Slate

Posted in alo, ATTRA, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on New Suitcase Offers Nothing New, Gets Big Writeup in Slate

Ben Carson’s Psychology Test Story Gets Even Weirder

by DeeDidomenico47 Posted on November 8, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

More Ben Carson news today! You remember Doc Carson’s story about the psychology test hoax that proved he was the most honest man at Yale? Well, Carson says it really happened, and the proof is on the right. It’s a piece from the Yale Daily News about a parody issue of the News published by the Yale Record. Apparently the parody issue announced that some psychology exams had been destroyed and a retest would be held in the evening. Hilarious!

This makes the whole story even more fascinating. It’s clear that Carson’s account is substantially different from the parody. He says the class was Perceptions 301. He says 150 students showed up. He says everyone eventually walked out. He says the professor showed up at the beginning, and then again at the end. He says the professor gave him ten dollars. None of that seems to have happened.

And yet—it certainly seems likely that this is where Carson got the idea for his story. He remembered the hoax, and then embellished it considerably to turn it into a testimony to the power of God. This even makes sense. It seemed like a strange story for Carson to invent, and it turns out he didn’t. He took a story he recalled from his Yale days and then added a bunch of bells and whistles to make it into a proper testimonial.

I have a feeling that posting this news clip won’t do Carson any favors. Before, he could just insist that it happened and call the media a bunch of liars. Now, he has to defend the obvious differences between the actual hoax and what he wrote in his book. That’s not likely to turn out well. His supporters will believe him utterly (just take a look at the comments to his Facebook post), but no one else will.

Then again, maybe all this stuff did happen. Maybe the hoaxsters got the professor to cooperate. Maybe 150 students showed up, not just “several.” Maybe a fake photographer really took his picture. Maybe the professor gave him ten dollars. The kids who printed the parody issue are probably all still alive and should be able to clear this up. Let’s go ask them.

Original link:

Ben Carson’s Psychology Test Story Gets Even Weirder

Posted in Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ben Carson’s Psychology Test Story Gets Even Weirder

Red States Spent $2 Billion in 2015 to Screw the Poor

by RashadPettis352 Posted on October 22, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Medicaid funding is shared by the states and the federal government. Between 2000 and 2013—the most recent year reported by the CMS actuaries—the share of Medicaid spending shouldered by the states increased by an average of 6.1 percent per year. This is not total spending. It’s just the portion the states themselves paid for.

In 2015, according to a survey by the Kaiser Foundation, spending by states that refused to expand Medicaid grew by 6.9 percent. That’s pretty close to the historical average. However, spending by states that accepted Medicaid expansion grew by only 3.4 percent. Obamacare may have increased total Medicaid enrollment and spending, but the feds picked up most of the tab. At the state level, it actually reined in the rate of growth.

In other words, the states that have refused the expansion are cutting off their noses to spite their faces. They’re actually willing to shell out money just to demonstrate their implacable hatred of Obamacare. How much money? Well, the expansion-refusing states spent $61 billion of their own money on Medicaid in 2014. If that had grown at 3.4 percent instead of 6.9 percent, they would have saved about $2 billion this year.

Here’s what this means: the states that refuse to expand Medicaid are denying health care to the needy and paying about $2 billion for the privilege. Try to comprehend the kind of people who do this.

POSTSCRIPT: Actually, there’s more. The residents of every state pay taxes to fund Obamacare, whether they like it or not. Residents of the states that refuse to expand Medicaid are paying about $50 billion in Obamacare taxes each year, and about $20 billion of that is for Medicaid expansion. Instead of flowing back into their states, this money is going straight to Washington DC, never to be seen again.

So they’re willing to let $20 billion go down a black hole and pay $2 billion extra in order to prevent Obamacare from helping the needy. It’s hard to fathom, isn’t it?

Read more: 

Red States Spent $2 Billion in 2015 to Screw the Poor

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Red States Spent $2 Billion in 2015 to Screw the Poor

Here’s the Secret Data Climate Scientists Are Hiding From Us

by TWWTawnyalsjmn Posted on October 21, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

For years, the more dimwitted of the climate denialists have been yammering on about a pause in global warming. This is not based on the measurements and models that even some climate scientists are puzzled about. It’s based on using a chart that begins in 1998, which was an unusually warm El Niño year. By using a very warm starting point and a more ordinary ending point, they make it look like nothing much has been going on for over a decade.

It’s all nonsense. But two can play at that game. Last year was quite warm, and this year is warmer still. From the New York Times: “The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the American agency that tracks worldwide temperatures, announced Wednesday that last month had been the hottest September on record, and that the January-to-September period had also been the hottest since 1880. Scientists say it is now all but certain that the full year will be the hottest on record, too.”

Hmmm. 2008 was a bit of an outlier on the cool side. So I think I’ll start there and end in 2015. Handily for me, NOAA now has a nice interactive tool that allows me to chart any period I want and even calculates the trend line for me. This generated the chart on the right. Naturally, I changed the y-axis to Fahrenheit in order to produce bigger, more dramatic numbers. Oh, and I started the y-axis at 0.8 °F instead of zero, because that produces a steeper, more apocalyptic trend line.

So there you have it. Proof positive that global temperatures are skyrocketing at a pace of 0.58 degrees per decade. This is the news that climate “scientists” in the pay of Big Fossil have been hiding from us. If you can’t trust a chart based directly on NOAA data, what can you trust?

Source: 

Here’s the Secret Data Climate Scientists Are Hiding From Us

Posted in FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s the Secret Data Climate Scientists Are Hiding From Us

Ryan: No Immigration Reform If He’s Speaker

by MaiChristiansen Posted on October 21, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Rep. Paul Ryan met with the Republican caucus in the House today and told them he was willing to run for Speaker. But only on his terms: unanimous support, reduced fundraising duties, and an end to mid-session attempts to remove the Speaker from power. According to a team of National Review reporters, he didn’t offer much in return—except for this:

Though it wasn’t a night in which Ryan was making many concessions — aside from a nod that he was seriously considering taking a job he has said publicly he does not want — he also hinted strongly that he will not bring an immigration bill to the House floor. He told his colleagues the issue was simply “too divisive” and he wanted to focus on the things on which the conference is in agreement, like border security and internal enforcement, as opposed to a comprehensive bill.

This doesn’t strike me as a huge concession. Ryan may be an immigration dove, but under the current circumstances there’s no way he’d try to cut a deal with Democrats for comprehensive immigration reform. Especially not during an election year. The conservative base rebelled over this in 2006 and then again in 2013. Bringing it up again would be nuts. And whatever else Ryan is, he’s not nuts.

So there you have it: no immigration reform this year or next. But you weren’t really expecting any, were you?

Read article here: 

Ryan: No Immigration Reform If He’s Speaker

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ryan: No Immigration Reform If He’s Speaker

This One Simple Trick Will Allow You to Make a Killing Betting on the Presidential Race

by ElenaAnivitti10 Posted on October 21, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Jim Tankersley examines the presidential odds at PredictWise today and concludes that punters are probably underestimating Hillary Clinton’s chances of winning. Why? Justin Wolfers explains that it’s likely due to something called “longshot bias”:

The favorite tends to win in betting markets more often than indicated by the odds. So if the markets say she’s a 47% chance to be president, history suggests that the true odds are a bit better than that.

….There’s another way to get at this though, which is simply to ask whether the odds make sense. I think the idea that Clinton is only a 75 percent chance to win the nomination is nuts — she’s essentially the only serious candidate running, and it’s now clear that her campaign is not going to implode. With any candidate there are risks that secrets may come out, but with Mrs. Clinton, we’ve had several decades for them to surface. So my (personal!) judgment is that she is at least an 85 percent chance to win the nomination, and maybe 90 percent is a more realistic assessment.

OK. But what I want to know is why the betting markets say that Democrats have a 58 percent chance of winning the presidency, but the combined chance of all the individual Democratic candidates is 63 percent. There must be some way to arbitrage this so that you’ll make money no matter what happens. Right?

Taken from: 

This One Simple Trick Will Allow You to Make a Killing Betting on the Presidential Race

Posted in Anker, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This One Simple Trick Will Allow You to Make a Killing Betting on the Presidential Race