He's what babies see when you can't figure out why they're crying.
He's what babies see when you can't figure out why they're crying.
Where did you find a machine that can compose and post an article that doesn't have a calculator buried somewhere in the system files?
With research studies showing that moderate coffee consumption has no adverse health effects, and may even have some health benefits, it may be surprising that the proliferation of coffee shops throughout the country hasn't hooked more people or caused current coffee drinkers to consume more. It may be that people are sensitive to their body's tolerance for caffeine and know when enough is enough, creating a natural barrier to consuming ever-increasing amounts. As a result, corner coffeehouses and advanced home brewing machines may make drinking coffee more convenient -- and even more pleasant -- for people, but they are not stirring Americans to drink more.As it turns out, coffee is not a particularly lucrative investment from a non-drinker's standpoint. TradingEconomics.com shows the price of coffee as being approximately flat (trend-wise) over a 30-year period:
Nearly every single college and university promotes "lifelong learning" as a core goal for its students and graduates. So much so that it's written into most mission or purpose statements of higher education institutions. And although most Americans -- students and parents especially -- say their No. 1 reason for attending or valuing college is "to get a good job," lifelong learning -- to most academics -- is considered a core mission of higher education. Given how much emphasis is placed on lifelong learning as a goal, it would be reasonable to think that higher education institutions have measured whether this outcome is being achieved.Setting aside post-graduates, education levels make absolutely no difference in the likelihood that people learn or do something interesting every day.
The academic world, however, is quick to dismiss purely economic outcomes as the sole purpose of higher education and for good reason. The common refrain then goes something like, "Yes, but it's not just about a job, it's about creating lifelong learners and engaged citizens." At which point everyone just nods approvingly without ever demanding any evidence. It's time to start digging for that evidence -- and quickly! So far, what Gallup has found doesn't look very good.Busteed goes on to cite evidence that the reason people might not become lifelong learners is due to poor, or at least unengaging, college instructors. Another possibility, however, is that "purely economic outcomes" really are the sole purpose of higher education. It's possible that people are primarily driven to complete a bachelor's degree so that they can get a good job, or at least that employers are motivated to weed-out college non-graduates in search of the best field of candidates for positions.
College is your opportunity to select your tax bracket. When you take that to heart, the decision becomes much easier. Lower tax brackets involve much less responsibility, and that is a choice that appeals to many people. In fact, there's nothing wrong at all with preferring a life of modest means and modest achievements, if that's what your choice is.
If you really do want to achieve something later in your life, then it is in your best interest to choose a high tax bracket during your college years. That means: Choose a college diploma that gives you very high earnings potential and work your tail off to be at the head of your class. Then, leverage that diploma and those grades toward getting the highest-paying job you can possibly find. It is at that point that all of the pieces finally fit together in your head.
Ten years later, ten years after graduating college, you will finally know what you want to do for a living. It might not be what you're doing, but you will have the means to pursue it, whatever it is. By "means" I mean both the financial ability to pay for it and the work experience required to earn a place in that position, whatever it might be.
You'll be expertly positioned for a lifetime of success in a field you enjoy. That's what you want, right?
Most production comes from high income countries. Production moves to countries with rising wages - practically as a mathematical axiom, if you think about it. So, on the margin, offshoring tends to move to countries with low but rising wages. A position against liberal trade and against offshoring is an elitist policy whose result is to stultify the incomes of the world's aspirational poor.
Like the Occupy Wall Street movement, Sanders's [sic] supporters are mostly white.In a literal sense, this may be true, but that sense is not very interesting. In a majority-white country like the United States, virtually every popular politician is bound to have a set of followers that skews white. That's about as interesting as discovering that the Government of Uruguay is "run by Latinos." If this is the sense in which Sumner meant that Sanders' "supporters are mostly white," then the statement seems regrettable in that it suggests that this is not true of other politicians.
...the representation of weirdoes [sic] and [consumers of deviant and borderline-illegal pornography] is no higher [on Reddit] than any other part of the population. But that’s not zero. And a disproportionate number of those people became interested in the new site [Voat].
Already, we see why the typical answer “If you don’t like your community, just leave and start a new one” is an oversimplification. A community run on Voat’s rules with Reddit userbase would probably be a pretty nice place. A community run on Voat’s rules with the subsection of Reddit’s userbase who will leave Reddit when you create it is…a very different community.When very smart people start thinking about very big ideas, they occasionally fall victim to the mouse that roared. In other words, "Scott Alexander" is speaking so enthusiastically about the problems of hardline libertarianism that a practical solution to the Reddit-Voat thing (and consequently also to the libertarian thing) is sitting right under his nose.
Fast-food workers in New York state would see a super-sized raise under a plan to phase in a $15 minimum wage — the first time a state has singled out a particular industry for such an increase.
The hike, approved Thursday by the state Wage Board, would increase gradually over three years in New York City and six years for the rest of the state. It would apply to employees at any fast-food restaurant with 30 or more locations, impacting an estimated 200,000 workers.And here's the second story, about "minimum wage:"
The movement to raise the minimum wage across the U.S. gained ground Wednesday with the huge University of California system announcing plans to increase base pay for its employees and contract workers to $15 an hour over the next two years.
The move follows similar steps by local governments to give employees what activists call a "living wage." Los Angeles, Seattle, San Francisco, Oakland and Berkeley have all approved phased-in increases that eventually will take their minimum wage to $15 an hour, or about $31,200 for a full-time job.Minimum wage is defined to be "the lowest remuneration that employers may legally pay to workers." (Don't like that link? Try this one instead.)
Graham was also inspired by the temperance movement and preached that a vegetarian diet was a cure for alcoholism, and, more importantly, sexual urges. The main thrust of his teachings was to curb lust. While alcohol had useful medicinal qualities, it should never be abused by social drinking. For Graham, an unhealthy diet stimulated excessive sexual desire which irritated the body and caused disease. While Graham developed a significant following known as Grahamites, he was also ridiculed by the media and the public for his unwavering zealotry. According to newspaper records,[which?] many women fainted at his lectures when he aired opinions both on sexual relations and the wearing of corsets.The main thrust of his teachings, you say? To curb lust, you say?