COVID-19 and the Economy
Should decisions about re-opening the U.S. economy be made purely based on epidemiology?
Of course not. Sure, suppose you come up with an idea for a COVID-19 policy, e.g., re-opening restaurants with no indoor seating, and you run it by the epidemiological community. You will get in return, with the maximum degree of precision possible, the most likely outcome in terms of the short-, medium-, and long-term health of the population, given the realities of things like testing facilities, the number of ICU bed-spaces, the probability of a vaccine in a certain time horizon, etc. (more…)
My wife and I had an amusing incident that I thought I’d share, hoping that it will make you smile too.
A reader asks: Do you know of any renewable energy companies that you think are well managed and positioned in their markets/industries? I want to start looking into rebalancing my investments.
Though Venn diagrams have been around since the days of the mathematician John Venn in 1880, they didn’t become an important part of what kids leaned in school until the 1960s. Now, of course, we see them everywhere, even when they’re used to express political comedy, e.g., the one at left.
My attempt at telling the story is here, and is interpreted as: only Trump shares all three characteristics.
Question: The first and second laws of thermodynamics conspire to make perpetual motion impossible. But suppose you’re like me, and you like to examine claims like the one below and identify precisely where they fall apart. What’s the exact reason that the “Archimedes Machine” below isn’t possible?
This is excellent.
As we near the election, we see Biden’s lead in the polls continuing to grow, as Trump’s words and actions become increasingly erratic and frightening. At the same time, we have the FBI statements to the effect that the voting process is extremely secure. Yet we also see warnings like the one at the left. What gives? 
Heresy?
From CNCB news analyst Rick Santelli, “I’ve said from day one, when Donald Trump gets in there, he’s going to make an equal number of Republicans unhappy as Democrats unhappy.”
As if this comes as a surprise to anyone, Amy Barrett, Trump’s pick to replace Justice Ginsburg, has implied that she opposes the landmark 2007 decision 
