Some comments on my clothes yesterday:
Continue reading "Clothes Make the Man" »
| Military | Park Slope |
A few new links in the "Recently Clicked" section of the sidebar. Enjoy!
|
The Illustrated Catalog Of ACME Products. Found on kottke.
| Cartoons |
|
Never mind the Horrocks, it's Brenda Blethyn who's the real star here. I'm sure this was a good play, but on-screen it's a bit flat, even though Jane Horrocks does some amazing vocal work. But there are better British seaside vaudeville movies, like Funny Bones or The Entertainer.
Sex and death on American television.
The Supreme Court finally figured it out - privacy rights protect homosexuals, too. It took them 17 years, but Bowers v. Hardwick is no more. A great day for civil rights.
| Constitution | Civil Rights | LGBT |
Here's a video of Bush on 9/11 doing NOTHING for five minutes after finding out the US has been attacked. Sure is a far cry from Bush saying "If some tinhorn terrorist wants me, tell him to come and get me! I'll be at home! Waiting for the bastard!". For more on this, check out an interesting day. Via This Modern World.
| George W. Bush | 9/11 |
We've been relying on take-out food a lot recently -- you know, having kids and all -- but I need your collective advice. Last night my father and stepmother were over visiting Zach and Ben, and we ordered from Lemongrass. The bill was $52.15. I followed my standard cab-fare and delivery tip rule: round up to the nearest dollar, add a dollar, or two if rounding up is less than $0.25. Of course there are exceptions (for cabs, airport and Brooklyn dropoffs, since they likely won't get a return fare; for deliveries, inclement weather, walkups, etc.) but generally that's what I do. So I handed the guy $54.00. (I happened to have only four singles.) He looked at it like I'd just given him 54 cents. "Only a dollar tip?!" I didn't point out that it was $1.85. These are the times when I know that, deep down, I'll always be a New York Transplant: I gave him an extra buck. (This required him to give me $5 and me to give him $60, which confused him.) The question is, was I extorted, or am I cheap? Since this has happened once before (a person delivering Indian expressing outrage over a small tip, citing a supposedly "discounted" meal price) I'm not entirely sure.
The way I see it, delivery is different from the 15% rule applied to waitstaff. They're providing a continuous service throughout the meal. A higher tab means I've spent longer there, or the place has more swankitude. In either case, I'd expect more / better service, and hence a tip that's commensurate with price.
But a delivery is a flat fee-for-service. The guy's gonna bike the 6 blocks regardless of whether I spend $10 or $50. It wasn't raining, and he didn't even have to walk up stairs, since we've got no buzzer in our building. So: am I cheap or something?
| Tipping |
In the vein of the Skokie Nazi march decision, it would seem that finding that the city can't fire workers because of their distasteful speech and actions is a favorable one for Free Speech. I'll be the first to admit that at the time, I was all in favor of their firing, but on reflection they can't be fired for being bigots or whatever category they correctly belong to (parody, my eye).
UPDATE: The original link is boinking, so you can go look at the New York Times version (if you are registered), the New York Post version, the New York Daily News version, or the New York Newsday version. (You have to pay a bukandaquater weekly to get the New York Sun online.)
| New York | Race | Free Speech | Employment |
So I'm going to South Africa for 2 weeks for a conference, networking, and a bit of exploration (although I've no idea of the leisure component yet, just the work parts). The travel nurse wrote out a prescription for Cipro, in case I hit travellers diarrhea. I'm not going to fill the prescription though, b/c I'm afraid that if I don't use the cipro while i'm there, if somebody in customs sees it they'll jump to the wrong conclusion and I'll end up being dissapeared while they twiddle their thumbs and dither. The irony here is that the top suspect for the anthrax terrorism event is a white american (and former Government employee), but I'll bet they'll look at my having cipro very differently from somebody else having it. I just have to cross my fingers and hope I don't end up really sick with the runs (it's easy enough to get meds in South Africa, but if you're really sick, then it's hard to crawl out of the hotel bed and to a pharmacy).
So one of the things that's sticking in my craw here is that they use profiling only one way. You never hear of all the white people in a location being stopped when the suspect is white. And even there is some sort of tip concerning a person of arabic descent, why stop only swarthy people ? People of arab descent have a broad range of physical characteristics, including blue-eyed arabs and Afro-Arabs from the Sudan. Yet still, it's the swarthy guys who get stopped while everyone else waltzes on with no scrutiny. That's when I start getting scared.
GRRRRRR
On a more pleasant note, I think that HP&OOP should be just the right length for my 18 hour plane ride !
| Drugs | Profiling | Anthrax | Airplanes | Security |
I am going to tread very, very carefully here. I just finished HP & OOP (about three minutes ago, after having read most of it during one 9-hour binge yesterday, so this isn't exactly a carefully-honed opinion...). What I want to say about the book--in a roundabout, spoiler-free way--is that it wasn't what I expected to have happen at all. I guess what I expected would happen will now happen in Book 6, which is a bit of a let-down. On the other hand, I thought Rowling handled the characters' move into adolescence more deftly than she's being given credit for. And now I will stop talking.
|
| Pirates | Orrin Hatch |
"Juneteenth is the oldest known celebration of the ending of slavery.
From its Galveston, Texas origin in 1865, the observance of June 19th as the African American Emancipation Day has spread across the United States and beyond."
I've been meaning to start to celebrate Juneteenth for some time, and I'm going to start in a small way this year. I really do think that we ought have a celebration of Emancipation in some way shape or form as part of confronting and acknowledging our slave-owning past. If people of all Abrahamic faiths can celebrate Moses' liberation of the Jews from Egypt, and we love the slave liberation metaphor in the Matrix, then can't we all celebrate the liberation (however partial) of African-Americans from bondage in the United States ?
I had some more coherent arguments for why I thought this was a good idea, and a very cool holiday, even though I'm not black and my family has never been nor owned slaves in America (or anywhere that I know of), but my mind is a blank now.
| Juneteenth | History | Race & Ethnicity |
" In Texas, Esshassah Fouad, a student from Morocco, was detained after his former wife accused him of plotting terrorism. She was sentenced to a year in prison for making a false charge. But Mr. Fouad was hit anyway with immigration charges, despite his pleas that he had missed school, violating his visa, because he was in jail." (From the NYT on false accusations against terrorism suspects).
Even if one is in favor of extremely zealous prosecution of all tips, the least they can do is to clear the names of people who are not charged, or even suspected. Moreover, punishing people for conditions brought on by prosecution based on false information (as above) is just plain vindictive.
But there is another issue -- this doesn't make us more safe. Chasing down every tip, no matter how poor in quality, even when the tipster has a conflict of interest, is a waste of resources that could be better spent on far higher priority issues. While the Bush administration is involved in vigorous prsecution on this front, they are ignoring industries that use harsh chemicals near major population centers, and therefore are major targets for an attack. I would rather they worked to strenthen our points of structural weaknesses rather than arresting guys based on empty tips from their ex-wives who are embroiled in custody battles with them. As in all things, there is a trade-off, and I think there are trade-offs that would make us feel much safer.
Sorry for the incoherence, soapbox off.
| Civil Liberties | Vorks | Immigration |
The Matrix Reloaded: The Abridged Script
|
Not A Sparrow Falls
Last week we took Ben and Zach to the Bronx Zoo. None of the Everett-Lane boys had been (myself included) had ever been, and Ben's mad about baboons lately. (Or, as he calls them "Babooo!") And tigers. ("Rrrrrrar!") Our first stop (after looking at the elephants en route) was the Dancing Crane Cafe for lunch. While Debbie was feeding Zach, Ben and I did some exploring outside. "Bir!" he pointed. Behind a drain pipe was a tiny baby sparrow cheeping for its mother and home.
Continue reading "Everett-Lanes to the rescue!" » | Fowl | Cars |
For some reason, I can't get MSN to stop being my homepage. Every time I change it, it somehow changes back. Dunno if it's some clever Microsoft thing or if it's due to the fact that I'm piggybacking (OK, stealing) bandwidth from my neighbor's WiFi connection. MSN has the worst, lowest-common-denominator stories on it; it makes USA Today look like the International Herald Tribune. But occasionally I'll actually click on a story, and this headline caught my eye: Iraqi man hid 22 years in a wall.
Sayed's face is all cheekbone and beard. He lost his teeth, and stores them in a matchbox. "They fell one by one. I kept them to remember the time I spent. Look at this molar. This one was 1990," he said.It's a pretty extraordinary story. Maybe if Sayed is lucky, CBS will try to land an interview deal with him and he'll get to host a MTV segment.
|
What does it mean to be a man?
| History |
Two great cases came down this week in criminal law. The first has to do with whether the state can force you to take medication to make you sane enough to stand trial. The court said that forced medication can only be used in "limited circumstances," adding a new wrinkle to the "insanity defense." The defendant in that case will now be able to avoid trial for his crimes - so long as he chooses to not take the drugs that would treat his mental illness.
FYI - These cases generally revolved around psychotics on death row refusing to take anti-psychotic medications at key times - mainly when they are on trial or due for sentencing. The logic is, since you can't convict a crazy person, you can avoid prosecution by refusing to treat your own mental illness. And, since you can't constitutionally execute an insane person. Many mentally ill defendants figure it is better to live with voluntary psychosis than, well . . . not live at all.
But it isn't all sunshine and roses for death-row inmates. In Oregon, the state has denied a kidney transplant to a death-row inmate. The problem, I guess, is that Oregon thought that maybe they should give him a transplant, as they were worried that he would die before they got a chance to kill him. On the flip side, it seemed odd to give him a kidney to keep him going long enough to fry him, especially since the procedure costs $100,000 and donated kidneys, as they say, don't grow on trees. They went with saving the kidney and just crossing their fingers that they can find the time to kill the man before his disease does. Good luck, guys!
Of course, Oregon now faces another difficult question: If it is O.K. to deny a death-row inmate a $100,000 operation to keep him alive long enough to kill him, how do they justify spending $120,000 every year to give the exact same inmate dialysis . . . to keep him alive long enough to kill him?
| Crime | Mental Illness | Capital Punishment |
...and now you, too, can be one of them. You may ask, what's the point? Even if I knew, I would not be at liberty to say...
| Flash Mobs | Distributed Culture |
Will someone please elect Vonnegut as our President? Before it's too late?
P.G. Wodehouse. You can always count on Jeeves to save the day. And Wodehouse to cheer one up.
Hatfields and McCoys sign truce. Peace at last.
|
From the BBC:
"A bomb found in a van at Londonderry was one of the biggest bombs ever found in the UK, police have said.
The bomb, containing 1200lbs of explosives, was primed and ready for detonation."
| Ireland |
This is a group in Northern Uganda which is trying to overthrow the Ugandan government and replace it with one that is based on the Ten Commandments. Their army is made of mainly kidnapped children, and they are supported militarily by the government in the Sudan. They've started to chop of people's noses, ears and sometimes lips as a way of instilling terror in the population. There's a fair amount on them on the web, but here is the latest BBC story, with some horrifying photographs.
| Africa | Religion | War |
Tony Randall does a great David Hyde Pierce imitation. See it on DVD, 'cuz the video lops off the Cinemascope.
Funny and adventurous, but too scary for Ben.
They sure make them some good teevee over there at Aitch Bee Oh!
.Eerie visuals, a great set (an actual abandoned mental hospital) and a fine performance by Peter Mullan -- but in the end, seems like a bad remake of The Shining.
|
Colin sent this to me a while back, about Stone Reader. I'm just getting around to posting it:
Continue reading "Everybody Must Get Stones" » 
Prof puts apocalypse odds at 50-50.
|
This is the 2,000th comment on Ish. Congrats to Ennis -- your toaster is on its way.
|
I first heard Peter Peterson, Nixon's Secretary of Commerce, at some think tank function several years ago. (His famous comment on resigning from Nixon's administration in '73: "My calves were too fat to click my heels.") He was speaking about the fiscal crisis facing the Social Security system, and I thought what he said made a lot of sense. In case you missed it in last week's Times magazine, you should really check out his article Deficits and Dysfunction, on the ludicrousness of the deficits we're creating, the dysfunctions of the GOP which has abandoned fiscal responsibility and has embraced tax cuts as a new religion, and the dysfunctions of the Dems who won't budge on entitlements at any cost. Read it.
| Deficit | GOP | Democrats | Peter Peterson |
So, I notice there has been very little chatter about the effort to extend the Child Tax Credit to "the People," or "the Poor" or "Working-Class America," or whatever noble label you prefer. Interestingly enough, however, if you take a hard look, this noble effort isn't nearly as noble as you might think. I won't even get into the petty squabbling between the House, Senate and White House, all of whom are just dying to pass it in their own way (though I love DeLay sniping at Bush). I just want to stick to some interesting math about this new tax cut. So, for you math and social policy mavens, here is your quiz for today:
I'm too impatient, because the more I look at this newest cut, the worse things look. And remember, I'm only looking at the modest and paid-for Senate version - don't even get me started on what a joke the House version is. But here are a couple of answers, and a couple of new questions . . . .
1. If the Senate Bill was passed (increasing the CTC by $400, effective immediately), the Brookings Institute estimates that approximately 7.1 million tax units (filers) would be affected (meaning, they have at least one child and are in an income bracket where they are eligible for the credit to some extent). What percentage of these recipients will receive an average tax cut of $400 or more?
(a) What kind of stupid question is that? If the credit increases by $400 per child, and since children don't come in fractions, then every eligible tax unit would at least $400. So 100%, moron!
(b) Oh, I see the trick - since the credit phases out for the rich, there will be a few people who won't get all of the extra $400, because they didn't get all of the original $600. But I'd still say about 90%, because lots of people have multiple children, and who cares about those phased-out fat-cats anyway?
(c) Well, I'm sure there are some nuances to the bill I don't understand, but I'd guess at least 50% of the people affected by this new law would get the full credit. Wouldn't they? I mean, shouldn't they? Isn't that the point?
(d) Since this whole "extending the tax credit to the working poor" is really about a weird concept called "refundability," I realize that the average tax benefit will reach $400 for less than 25% of eligible recipients - regardless of the number of children they have.
(d). All these cuts do is increase the "refundability" of the credit by 5% (from 10% to 15%). That means you are STILL excluded or phased out for having too little income or tax liability - it just means the bar has been lowered to include more people. But the bar is moving so modestly, the majority of recipients will still receive less than $400 because they are TOO poor - they don't make enough to get any money back. In fact, 21.8% of all recipients will see $100 or less, and 45.3% will see $200 or less - and yes, that average tax cut accounts for people with multiple children. Only 24% of all recipients will break the $400 mark.
2. If the Senate Bill were passed, which AGI class(es) would enjoy the largest average tax benefit?
(a) People making less than $10,000 a year.
(b) People making more than $10,000 a year, but less than $25,000 a year.
(c) People making more than $25,000 a year, but less than $50,000 a year.
(d) People making more than $50,000 a year.
(d). The average tax cut to a taxpayer making more than $50,000 a year is $597. The average tax cut of people making less than $10,000 a year is $233. The average tax cut of people making from $10,000 to $25,000 a year is $247. The average tax cut of people making from $25,000 to $50,000 is $523.
3. If the Senate Bill were passed, which AGI class would enjoy the smallest average tax benefit?
(a) People making less than $5,000 a year.
(b) People making $5,000 - $10,000 a year.
(c) People making $10,000 - $15,000 a year.
(d) People making $15,000 - $20,000 a year.
(c). The people who make $10,000 - $15,000 a year can expect to take home an average of $123 each - and that average includes families with multiple children. This income bracket is not only the most screwed, but it is the largest, representing 2.7 million families, or 38% of all beneficiaries. But you weren't really wrong no matter which bracket you chose - because these four are the four groups that would be the worst off of any recipients. Combined, their average tax break is $203 dollars. The next lowest bracket? The $20,000 - $25,000 earners (of course), who will take home an average of $445 each.
Depressed yet? Well, that's because you haven't tried the BONUS QUESTION!!!
4. In 2002, our nation had nearly 139 million taxpayers. Of these, nearly 33 million of them survive on an adjusted gross income of less than $10,000 a year (that's about a quarter of our country, in case your counting). How many of these 33 million taxpayers will receive a benefit from the new Senate tax cut?
(a) All of them! This bill was meant to help the poorest of the poor!
(b) You tried to trick me again - not all of those taxpayers even have children. Maybe half of people will qualify.
(c) Refundability is tricky. And not everybody has kids. And this bill is political propoganda, not true tax relief for the poor. Maybe 10%.
(d) 87,000 taxpayers. Those other 32,913,000 people should have more kids if they want tax breaks! TANSTAAFL!
Whee! Tax is fun!
| Tax Policy | Quiz |
Simulacra, Simulation and Science Fiction.
| Tron | Academics | Science Fiction |
| War |
Almost too beautifully shot.
The Mitchum / Peck version; about 10 times better than the Scorsese remake, and I liked that. Peck shows the dark side of Atticus Finch; and man is Mitchum menacing in this movie.