Month: February 2013

Made easy:

Just in time for Valentine’s Day, the Tax Policy Center has updated its marriage bonus and penalty calculator to reflect the provisions of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA),the new tax law Congress passed earlier this year. The new calculator lets you compare the tax bills of a couple filing as singles and as a couple for either the 2012 or 2013 tax year.

While Amy Webb found her perfect match through data, Josh Freedman at McSweeney’s is using it to call things off:

This may feel cold, but there’s nothing cold about well-reasoned analysis. Like all humans, I know I am fallible—and since I have a natural tendency to improperly discount the future, I have made sure to accurately determine present future value of costs and benefits. But even considering the diminishing marginal returns of hitting on the aforementioned drunk slutty girls, the numbers simply do not want us to be together.

I know this breakup might come as a bit of a shock to you, which I have also factored in. The disappointed look on your face costs me 5 utils of pleasure, but the knowledge that this is the right decision in the long-term makes up for that. Additionally, I have included in my calculations the fact that as a courtesy I will have to pay for this dinner in its entirety, which, given the gender parity we have previously expressed in our relationship, would normally cost me only half that.

(Cartoon from XKCD)

Increasing the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is a more effective and cheaper response to poverty than raising the minimum wage. Josh Barro explains why tinkering with the EITC isn’t on the table:

The big reason is that a bigger EITC would grow the federal budget deficit, while a minimum wage increase is “free.” Of course, it’s not really free — just like the EITC, it’s a transfer to low-wage workers, though instead of being financed with taxes it will come mostly out of business profits; some of the transfer will come from consumers in the form of higher prices.

But the transfer is done off the government’s books, which is what counts in Washington.

Today on the Dish, Andrew took apart Rubio’s dogmatic and hypocritical rejoinder to the SOTU and responded to readers’ thoughts on the president’s remarks. He revisited the Gitmo question and spared a moment to reckon our mortality on Ash Wednesday. Later, Andrew poured another drink with Hitch as they discussed the ever-present specter of fanaticism, and pointed Canadian readers to a new pub named after his old friend.

In political coverage, we rounded up more reax to the SOTU as well as Rubio’s lame follow-up, before digging deep into Obama’s proposal for universal pre-K. After Bouie brought up the GOP’s real immigration problem, readers took on conventional wisdom on boosting minimum wage, which Mark Perry pushed back on here. Bernstein called the Hagel nomination the latest in a mondo-filibuster, readers were boggled by James Inhofe’s latest sermon on U.S. foreign policy, and Armin Rosen toured a new site for real development in Palestine.

Meanwhile, we debated the death sentence in democracies, Nassim Taleb cautioned us not to overestimate the new era of Big Data, and George Packer insisted that we shouldn’t confuse our own bodily decay with the world’s at large. Benjamin Dueholm explored the Pope’s remarks on economic justice as Gregory Clark described the best methodology to study social mobility.

In assorted news and views, John Gruber traced the history of the printed-*cough* and Peter Elbow suggested academia hurts our writing more than its helps. We once again got a message to burn after texting and toyed with a new program that can rebuild languages lost. Elsewhere, we looked at the Lama bubble as Shafer asked for another plate of mustang. We rose early at St. John the Divine in New York City for the VFYW, stood before the Pope for the Face of the Day, and grooved point-by-point through the MHB.

–B.J.

This embed is invalid

 

Christine Baumgarthuber lays out the extravagant welcome provided by medieval monks to travelers stopping to rest:

[T]he monastery’s residents delighted in unexpected guests, whom they met with an effusive greeting that began with a kiss of peace and washing of hands and feet before proceeding to prayer and culminating in a rich repast. Along with good cheer the monks heaped on their visitors roast pigeon and hare, egg-thickened porridge, great planks of salted salmon, mounds of glittering whelks, fillets of bream and lamprey, thick porpoise steaks, and other fruits of sea and lake. Vegetables fresh from the monastery’s garden arrived at table, as did fruit from its orchard. And bread, loaves and loaves of bread: Four kinds the monks had, from black to white and every shade between… [N]o matter how self-denying the order, the traveler could count on it to produce a cheering cup..

On the other hand:

[I]t was those the traveler passed on his way to the monastery who often bore the cost of his night’s entertainment. Though clever and industrious, monks were not wholly self-sufficient. They depended on the toil of people who lived and worked beyond their cloisters’ gates. On fairs and markets they levied dues. They controlled local bake-houses, mills, wine presses and stud bulls. From farmers and artisans they demanded tithes, and, where permissible, they owned serfs. No mere Peter’s pence, such exaction burdened folks who in most cases lived at or slightly above subsistence. Indeed the old rules of hospitality were such that a free lunch often meant someone went without supper.

(Video clip from The Name Of The Rose, which is available in its entirely on Youtube starting here.)

During his speech, the senator said:

When we point out that no matter how many job-killing laws we pass, our government can’t control the weather — he accuses us of wanting dirty water and dirty air.

Chait sees the comment as a dog whistle:

[W]hat’s going on here is that Rubio wants to uphold the Republican position without coming across to non-Republicans as a total yahoo. So he is not directly questioning the carbon-climate link, but instead moving his skepticism to the climate-weather link. Saying “government can’t control the weather” sounds plausible enough — a way to take a position that doesn’t sound completely insane to audiences but is, in fact, completely insane. In this way, it is the quintessential Marco Rubio utterance.

Ezra also pushes back:

No one suggests the government can control the weather. The argument — which is thoroughly in line with market-based economics — is that carbon can be priced to better reflect the harm it does to the environment.

That’s Heidi Halvorson’s advice:

When you are an expert, and you already more or less know what you are doing, it’s negative feedback that can help you do what it takes to get to the top of your game. I’m not suggesting that you never tell the rookie about his mistakes, or that you never praise the seasoned professional for her outstanding work. … But I am suggesting that piling on praise is a more effective motivator for the rookie than the pro. And I’m saying, point blank, that you shouldn’t worry so much when it comes to pointing out mistakes to someone experienced.