Watson has lots in common with a top-ranked human Jeopardy! player: It’s very smart, very fast, speaks in an uneven monotone, and has never known the touch of a woman.
Ken Jennings, reporting on his failed battle against our new robotic overlords.
Category: Uncategorized
Four Memes that Need to DIE
1: Just like any family sitting at their kitchen table does…
2: Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill workin’ nights an’ evenin’s together to find the best…
3: Tighten our belts…
4: Social Security will be “broke” in…
Social Security isn’t even hard to understand. Taxes go in, benefits go out. Unlike healthcare, which involves extremely difficult questions of technological advancement and the specter of rationing, Social Security is just arithmetic.
[…]
Right now, Social Security costs about 4.5% of GDP. That’s going to increase as the baby boomer generation retires, and then in 2030 it steadies out forever at around 6% of GDP.
That’s it. That’s the story. Our choices are equally simple. If, about ten years from now, we slowly increase payroll taxes by 1.5% of GDP, Social Security will be able to pay out its current promised benefits for the rest of the century. Conversely, if we keep payroll taxes where they are today, benefits will have to be cut to 75% of their promised level by around 2040 or so. And if we do something in the middle, then taxes will go up, say, 1% of GDP and benefits will drop to about 92% of their promised level. But one way or another, at some level between 75% and 100% of what we’ve promised, Social Security benefits will always be there.
This is not a Ponzi scheme. It’s not unsustainable. The percentage of old people in America isn’t projected to grow forever. Lifespans will not increase to infinity. Taxes go in, benefits go out. It’s simple.
Kevin Drum: big yep. And almost a usable political slogan as well: Taxes go in, benefits come out. Got to work on something for the T-word, though.
It is, however, remarkable how the serious people in the MSM have obligingly turned Social Security into some sort of indecipherable rocket science which everyone knows will be defunct sometime later this week, all without ever pausing to consider that Social Security is A): self funded outside the annual budget (and therefore deficit neutral for many, many years to come), and B): the easiest fix currently in the entire governmental clusterfuck that the GOP both caused and loves to natter on about. You want to talk about something important? Let’s talk Medicare or defense spending if you want to get at the real dollars, Gwen. Let’s talk about the Bush tax cuts. Your Liberal Media.
It is, however, remarkable how the serious people in the MSM have obligingly turned Social Security into some sort of indecipherable rocket science which everyone knows will be defunct sometime later this week, all without ever pausing to consider that Social Security is A): self funded outside the annual budget (and therefore deficit neutral for many, many years to come), and B): the easiest fix currently in the entire governmental clusterfuck that the GOP both caused and loves to natter on about. You want to talk about something important? Let’s talk Medicare or defense spending if you want to get at the real dollars, Gwen. Let’s talk about the Bush tax cuts. Your Liberal Media.
If the deficit was actually something anybody cared about, they’d be interested in raising revenue. You don’t have to raise tax rates to raise revenue, you just have to increase the number of goddamn jobs.
Duncan Black aka Eschaton, on jobs, revenue, and the deficit.
As Gwen Ifill was being all serious person last night talking to and asking the tough questions of Jack Lew on why he won’t just admit that Social Security must be eliminated, preferably today if we as a nation are to survive, I found myself jumping up and down screaming “revenue, revenue, revenue.” It was a special Valentine’s Day moment for the wife. But: revenue. It’s a word that never, ever comes up in the MSM. Instead, they have laserlike focus on the elimination of Social Security, the one entitlement that is perfectly fine for 40+ years, and then only moderately not fine after that. But they aren’t likely to depend on it, so it has to go. Medicare? Well, not so much. They see a real benefit for themselves in that one.
This is why Our Republic is coming apart at the seams.
As Gwen Ifill was being all serious person last night talking to and asking the tough questions of Jack Lew on why he won’t just admit that Social Security must be eliminated, preferably today if we as a nation are to survive, I found myself jumping up and down screaming “revenue, revenue, revenue.” It was a special Valentine’s Day moment for the wife. But: revenue. It’s a word that never, ever comes up in the MSM. Instead, they have laserlike focus on the elimination of Social Security, the one entitlement that is perfectly fine for 40+ years, and then only moderately not fine after that. But they aren’t likely to depend on it, so it has to go. Medicare? Well, not so much. They see a real benefit for themselves in that one.
This is why Our Republic is coming apart at the seams.
PREDICTION: House GOP will almost certainly lose some seats in 2012 then dump Boehner for being not conservative enough.
Matt Yglesias rends the fabric of time and space via Twitter. I think he’s almost certainly right.
Radical as this seems to Americans, the rest of the world has figured this out and gotten it right. We keep getting it wrong, and we’re paying for it.
Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin, talking to Ezra Klein about his plans to make Vermont the first all single payer healthcare state in the Union.
I eagerly await the “why this instance isn’t actually states’ rights” argument from the GOP.
I eagerly await the “why this instance isn’t actually states’ rights” argument from the GOP.
President Trump
For weeks, Mr. Trump has been engaged in not-so-quiet discussions about making a potential White House bid, but he has taken few visible steps, beyond television interviews, to test his support and demonstrate his seriousness. By accepting an invitation to appear at [CPAC], Mr. Trump is once again fueling speculation about his political future — and generating maximum exposure in the process.
Help us Flying Spaghetti Monster, HELP US!
Is It Time to Rein In the Super Bowl?
Lots of good stuff in this article:
The last great building binge in the NFL was from 1995 through 2003, when 21 stadiums were built or refurbished in order to create more luxury boxes, at cost of $6.4 billion. Know how much of that the public paid for? $4.4 billion.
The richest people in the richest, most popular sport in America. And you and I foot the bill for almost all of it in the name of “economic impact” that those eight home games a year supposedly have on a stadium neighborhood that’s inevitably parking lots as far as the eye can see. Hell, we’re even on the hook for the half-million dollar flyover. Absolute lunacy. Sally, the Superbowl, and the mega-arenas built to host it, can be any scale the NFL (and the owners running it) want it to be. Just so long as they are willing to pay for it.
But let’s not leave this quote on the floor:
the state of Texas [spent] $31 million to host the Super Bowl, even as deficits force public school cuts
Says it all.
(reblogged from wanderingreveries)
As I’ve said before, lots of Glenn Beck listeners aren’t in on the joke. Unlike Roger Ailes, Jonah Goldberg, and every staffer at the Heritage Foundation happy hour, they don’t realize that the Fox News Channel puts this man on the air fully understanding that large parts of his program are uninformed nonsense mixed with brazen bullshit. When a Fox News host tells these viewers, “I’m not going to treat you like you’re a moron,” playing on their insecurity about other media outlets talking down to or lying to them, they take it at face value. What sort of callous, immoral person allows these viewers to be played for fools?
Conor Friedersdorf getting to a one-sentence sketch of Roger Ailes. Until the broader sphere progressive politicians and media in general deals with that “I’m not going to treat you like you’re a moron” part, we’ll get nowhere.
As Friedersdorf says, Ailes et al. “ought to be objects of disgrace, akin to any other manipulative huckster who preys on the elderly.” That they aren’t is why we fail.
As Friedersdorf says, Ailes et al. “ought to be objects of disgrace, akin to any other manipulative huckster who preys on the elderly.” That they aren’t is why we fail.
And I’ve been wanting to learn more about nothing! Preferably through the liberal application of carefully disguised bromides.
(courtesy of the Malcolm Gladwell Book Generator)
Lemkin 