This is c. 20% of oil and gas (less whatever the Saudis can move by pipeline), a similar amount of nitrogen, at least 30% of urea and also helium (important input for e.g. chip manufacturing) out of the system.
This is not a guy who thinks even one step ahead, so we could be waiting for a while
One other option (that I believe the NWO has tried at least once) is randomization: short applications, select at random from all those above some quality threshold (a score or % of the total submissions).
My other concern would be the career stage distribution of this funding. Would it all go to people who have permanent positions already? Nearly all of my cohort have needed to win 1-2 early career grants because ~no one is hired straight from a PhD.
This is fair, although to what extent is the time spent on staff applications “monetizable” for institutions? My impression (and personal experience FWIW) is that people are more likely to work outside of normal hours on funding applications.
Given the state of funding, doesn’t this mean the amounts awarded will be minimal? (And too small to do anything ambitious?)
He isn’t, he’s a Republican.
(Imo) impossible to take Graeber seriously after reading that.
I can’t have been the only voter who saw his name on the ballot and thought “he’s a bit…sketchy”.
Could have stopped after 8 words
There is some work on debates about technological unemployment/the machinery question (see Amy Bix on the US in the the 20th century and Maxine Berg on GB in the 19th), from which one can see in some ways similar debates to more recent times over the extent of Say’s compensation effects.
Apologies, completely forgot to reply to this!
Difficult to answer this in <300 characters, but, to generalize massively: new work was probably harder to find for women and for older workers because of occupational segregation and the need to move to new work.
Maybe because it’s considered his worst crime, so a short description will cut out the other ones?
The life experience of a guy whose dad is a famous professor of economics at Harvard does not have external validity.
A moment in the history of viewpoint diversity in US universities
We are here
Yikes 😳
Our newest member of the Subsidize Demand in a Supply Shock Club
Every politician who does this is maximizing the pain for poor countries that have to import fuel.
Or they could build lots of golf courses
Presumably what Porter is talking about in the full clip is that businesses are making sure workers don’t end up doing overtime, so workers are paid less in total than they would be if there OT threshold were higher and managers assigned them more hours. Is that right?
They had a big açaí berry phase but I think it's over now
Find someone who loves you as much as the New York Times crossword editors love eels
FIFA's stance is that hosts bear all the costs of hosting the World Cup, and in turn, FIFA bears all the reward
Every rich country politician who is subsidizing fossil fuel use (read: cutting fuel taxes) is maximizing the suffering of people in these countries. A spectacularly awful policy on every level.
We see once again the bizarre phenomenon noted by @larryglickman.bsky.social that only Democrats have agency in US politics
By my count we have at least 🇮🇪, 🇳🇴, 🇩🇪 and parts of 🇺🇸 doing versions of the same self-defeating *and* harmful policy.
Our next entrant in “subsidizing demand during a supply shock” 🙄
David Remnick on the @newyorker.com Podcast: “I don’t think there’s really much doubt that in our lifetimes at least, AI is going to bring changes as significant as the Industrial Revolution.”
Did he give any evidence for this extraordinary claim? No, not one piece.
Péter Magyar FB: “Prime Minister Viktor Orbán just called to congratulate us on our victory.”
IT'S DONE. IT'S DONE.
Living example of “let someone else deal with it”: bsky.app/profile/rshe...