• Twitter’s down message is really cute — little birds carrying a whale! http://j.mp/Fva6e I’ve still had enough of it I think… #twitter #
• Googles latest trick: search your body, all layers http://bodybrowser.googlelabs.com/ #
• Indulge in Christmas spirit http://youtu.be/SXh7JR9oKVE #flashmob and then get cured http://youtu.be/BqfZUX5svCg #montypython #
• Hartz IV und die Pille: http://j.mp/iezjMI #Sarrazin #

Powered by Twitter Tools

Greg Mankiw points to four economists‘ interpretations of the old Christmas story of Ebenezer Scrooge. The first one, by Paul Krugman, does not really talk much about Scrooge at all, but is an interesting read for it’s coverage of systematic media manipulation by the Political Right in the US (demonstrated on the issue of an allegedly expanding government workforce under President Obama).

The second, by David Henderson, stays closer to the story, and tries to make an interesting point. The claim is that increasing government welfare is actually the „scroogeish“ thing to do, contrary to what many would think at first, and that it is individual charitable giving that follows the true spirit of Christmas. These two approaches are polarized as coercion vs. compassion. I’m blogging about it because I think it is a recurrent theme in discussions, and maybe one issue where political „left“ and „right“ are truly separated by contradicting perspectives.

[…]

Granted that Google has grown into a controversial giant, with a grip on our personal data and lives so firm that a skeptic watchfulness seems in place. They do stay in front of a digital revolution that often serves the common good as well as their own. The latest trick has the magic name „N-Grams“, refering to combinations of N words, starting with single words. The idea is to use the scanned Google Books database to count the frequency of words over time. The data is available freely, both for download to be used in „serious“ statistical analysis, and in an easy online tool.

A NYTimes article points to an example comparing the appearance of „men“ and „women“ and supposedly showing a „feminism bump“ in the 1970s. The German newspaper ZEIT twittered a history of nuclear energy and the nuclear waste debate.

Of course, this entry of an abundance of numbers into classical research domains of the humanities is controversial, as the NYTimes reports. The founders are aiming high:

[…]

Greg Mankiw makes a compelling case in his recent NYTimes column that expenditure cuts (i.e. reducing tax exemptions) should please both political parties and both corresponding camps of society. A strong proposition along that line has been made by Obamas deficit reduction commission. Especially interesting: tax expenditures strongly favor people with high income. And Mankiw never even mentions the reduced hassle in filing taxes that would result from thinning out the expenditure forest!

When I wrote about divided government being good government, I think I didn’t quite have that kind of addition to the governing Democrats in mind.

I couldn’t figure out if there’s a serious possibility of one of these guys becoming the new chairman of the Energy Committee, but Joe Barton has been the „Ranking Member“, i.e. the leading minority member. It could be really funny if it wasn’t real:

[…]

I wouldn’t usually like to end a post title with a question mark — it does remind me of yellow press. But what else can I do writing about a book I haven’t read myself?

Judging from a NYTimes book review of „Disconnect“ by Devra Davis, though, the German radiation paranoia might turn out to be quite sensible. To put it cautiously: It is at least scientifically plausible that cell phone usage (i.e. holding it to your head while speaking) is linked to brain cancer:

[…]

The NYTimes has an interactive puzzle where you get to select from a range of suggested ways for the government to save money, increase revenue and thus reduce the deficit. It’s certainly good to see these measures in the context of other ways to spend or save money, and with the background of „something has to be done“. Surely makes you understand politics and politicians a little bit better. Even though I never thought reducing the deficit was that easy! Here are my results. I just raised taxes for completeness‘ sake, the budget was balanced before…

A little riddle, part of a ad-hoc social science study of mine The results and explanations will be posted here soon.

[wpsqt_page name=„doctor“]

A NYTimes article with the fitting title „While Warning About Fat, U.S. Pushes Cheese Sales“ delivers a great (in both senses of the word) example of what special interest money does to a democratic government. It talks about how, while at the same time trying to get people to eat more healthy food, the US government is sponsoring campaigns promoting one of the single most unhealthy foods in the American diet: Cheese. And on a whole different scale.

Let’s start with the nutritional facts, hopefully old news for most people:

[…]

Another post from Happy Sunday Newspaper Day. Like most people, I like having my views confirmed. This time it is NYTimes Op-Ed Contributor Jonathan Rauch arguing eloquently and concisely how divided government (i.e., a Democratic President and Republican House) comes about, and why it is a pretty good solution to the political landscape we face.

The only thing I would like to add is that the pretty short periods of one-party government time are not lapses of the system, but a very valuable ingredient in themselves. The salt in the bipartisan soup if you will, little bursts of innovation and reform that are later smoothed out by bipartisan compromises.

And I think it is fascinating to note that in a completely different political system, Germany spends a lot of time in a similar bipartisan state as well.